REGISTERED No. D. 222
The Gazette of India
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 50] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889
Separate paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed
as a separate compilation.
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
Statutory orders and notifications issued by the Ministries of the Govern- ment of India (other than the Ministry of Defence) and by Central Authorities (other than the Administration of Union Territories).
ELECTION COMMISSION, INDIA New Delhi, the 23rd November 1967
S-O. 4372—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 21 and sub-section (1) of section 22 of the Representation of" the People Act, 1951 and in supersession of its notification No. 434/HN/66 dated the 3rd December, 1966, the Election Commission hereby appoints, in res- pect of each of the Parliamentary constituencies in the State of Haryana and specified in column I of the Table below:—
(a) the officer specified in the corresponding entry in column 2 of the said Table to be the Returning Officer; and
(b) the officers specified in the corresponding entry in column 3 of the said Table 10 assist the Returning Officer in the performance of .his functions :—
TABLE
Returning Officer
Assistant Returning Officer Name of the Constituency
2
1
3
Deputy Commissioner, Ambala. 1. Sub-Divisional Officer, Nara- 1 . Ambala
ingarh
2. Sub-Divisional Officer, Jaga-
dhri
3. District Development and Panchayat Officer, Ambala. 4. Revenue Assistant, Ambala.
C 4595 )
1^596 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-I
2
3
2. Karnal
Deputy Commissioner, Karnal. 1. Sub-Divisional Officer, Thane-
sar
2. Revenue Assistant, Karnal. 3. General Assistant, Karnal. 4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Pani-
pat.
3. Kaithal . • .
Deputy Commissioner, Karnal. 1. Sub-Divisional Officer, Tba-
nesar.
2. District Development and
Pancha\at Officer, Karnal.
3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Kai-
thal.
4. Sub-Divisional Officer,
Nawana.
4. Rohtak
Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak . i. Genera! Assistant, Jind 2. District Development and
Panchayai Officer, Jind.
3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Go-
hana.
4. Revenue Assistant, Rohtak. 5. General Assistant, Rohtak.
5. Jhajjar
Deputy Commissioner- Robtsk. 1. Sub-Divisional Officer, Sere-
pat.
2. District Development and
Panchaya* Officer, Rohtak. 3. General Assistant. Robtok. 4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Jhaiiar
5. Gurgaon .
Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon
1. Sub-Divisional Officer, Tallab-
garh.
2. Sub-Divisiona! Officei, Falwal •3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Feroze-
pur, Jh'rka.
4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Nuh. 5. Revenue Assistant, Gurgoon.
7. Mahendragarh .
Deputy Commissioner, Mahen-
f.ragarh at Narnaul,
1. Revenue Assistant, Gurgaon 2. Sub-Divisional Officer, Rewari 3. Disuict Development and Pancba>.°.t Officer, Gurgaon.
4. Fevenue Assistant, Narn 5. Distr'ct Development and Pan: hpy-x Officer, Narnaul. 6. Sub-L'iv'-ional Officer, Ma-
hendragai'h.
i. ?ub-Di":sional Officer, Ma- 8. Hissar.
Deputy Commissioner, Hissar.
berdrpcaih.
2. Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhi-
wai.i.
3. Sub-Divisional Ofliccr Hansi. 4. Revenue Assistant, Kissar. 5. General Assistant, Hissar.
0. Sirsa
Deputy Commissioner, Hissar. 1. Kevem-'e Assistant,Hisssr. 2. Sub-Divisional Officer, Fat
habad.
3. Sub-Div sional Officer, Sirsa. 4. District' Development and
Panchayat Officer, Hissar.
[No. 434/HN/67]
K. S. KAJAGOrALAN, Secy.
SEC. "(ii)] THE GAZETTE OE INDIA: DEC. 10, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4597MINISTRY OF LAW
(Legislative Department)
New Delhi, the 22nd November 1967
S.O, 4373,—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 10 of the Dargh Khwaja Saheb Act, 1955 (36 of 1955"), the Central Government in consultation with the Government of Rajasthan, hereby constitutes, with Immediate effect, an Advisory Committee for a period of one year for the purpose of advising the Nazim in the discharge of his functions under the said Act and also for such other purposes as may be specified in the bye-laws of the Dargh Committee, consisting of the following persons, namely;—-
1. Maulana Abdul Shakoor, M.P. Inderkot, Ajmer. 2- Syeri Abdul Baqi, Hallz Man7.il, Chowk Pannigaran, Ajmer- 3. Shri Peer Mohammad Ghoshi, Outside Delhi Darwaza, Ajmer. 4. Syed Saulat Husain AH Khan, Dcwan Saheb Dargah, Ajmer.
[No, ll(7)/67-Wakf.]
M, H. DIN, Director (Wakfs).
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
New Delhi, the 30t/i November 19H7
S.O. 4374.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Emigra- tion Act, 1922 (VII of 1922), the Central Government horoby appoint Shri M. IVTuthuK'.vamy, Protector of Emigrants. NagapaHinam to be Protector of Emi- grants, Mandapam Camp and Tuticorin in addition to his own duties with effiect from the afternoon of October 13, 1967 to November 30, 1967 r-ice Shri T. C. Nithyanandam. Proertnr ot Emigrants, Mand-apam Camp and Tuticorin granted leave for the said period.
This supersceds this Ministry's Gazette Notification No. CPEO/21/67 dated November 6, 1967.
|_No. CPEO/22/67,]
S.O, 4375.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of Emigration Act, J922 the Central Government hereby appoint Shri J. A. David, Public Re- lations Officer, Regional Passport and Emigration Office, Delhi, to be Protector of Emigrants in addition to his own duties with effect from November 4, 1967 vice Shri A, S. Malhotra, Superintendent in the same office.
[No. CPEO/23/67.] C. S. V. SUNDRAM, Attache (PVA).
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Detriment of Economic Affairs)
New Delhi, the 28th November 1967
S.O. 4376.—In pursuance of clause fd) of sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the state Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 ol 1055), the Central Government, in consulta- tion with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates Shri D. C. Khanna 4/7, Kalkaji, New Delhi as a director of the Central Board of the State Bank of India with effect from the 1st December, 1967.
[No. F. 8/93/67-SB.]
S.O. 4377.—In pursuance of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1055), the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates the following persons to be
4598 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25', 1889 [PART U-members of the Calcutta, Madras; New Delhi, Kanpur and Ahmedabad Local Boards of the State Bank of India respectively with effect from the 1st December, 1067: —
Calcutta Local Board
Shri V. V- Parekh, 52/4, Ballygunge, Circular Road, Calcutta.
Madras Local Board
Dr, P. Natesa Mudalier, 22/23, Nattu Pillaiyar Koil Street, Madras.
New Delhi Local Board
Dr. A- M- Khusro, Institute of Economic, Growth, Delhi.
Kanpiur Local Board
1. Dr- Baljit Singh, Head of the Department ol Economics, Lucknow Univer- sity, Lucknow.
2. Dr- P. K. Kelkar, Director, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. Ahmedabad Local Board
Prof- M- B. Desai, M. S- University of Baroda, Baroda.
[No. P. 8/93/B7-SB.J
S.O 4378. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 53 of the Banking Regulation Aft, 1949 (10 of 1949), the Central Government, on the recommenda- tion of the Reserve Bank of India, hereby declare that the provisions of Note (f) appended to Form A in the Third Schedule to the said Act .shall not apply until the 1st January 1M8 to the State Bank of India, any banking institution notified under section 51 of the said Act and any banking company which, when the value shown in the Inner column against any of the subheads (ti), (iii), (iv) and (v) of item 4 on the Property and Assets side of the said Form exceeds the market value of the investments under that sub-head, shows separately within brackets the market value of the Investments under that sub-head.
[No. F 15(24)-BC/fl7-l
New Delhi, the 29th November 1967
S.O. 4379.—In pursuance of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1P55), the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates the following persons to be members of the Bombay, Calcutta, Kanpur and Ahmedabad Local Boards of the State Bank of India respectively with effect from the 1st December, 1967: -
Bombay Local Board
1. Shri V- Dandeknr, Gokhale Institute, Poona. 2. Shri B- D. Garware, Garware Motors & Engineers Private Ltd-, Chowpatty Chambers, Sandhurst Bridge, Bombay. Calcutta Local Board
Shri K. C Maitra, Guest Keen Williams, Calcutta.
Kanpur Local Board
Shri H. N- Bhartfava, 3/11, Nawabganj, Kanpur.
Ahmedabad Local Board
Shri Maganbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel, Chairman, Gujarat State Cooperative Bank Ltd , Ahmedabad.
[No. F. 8/93/67^SB.]
SO 438O.—In pursuance of clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the
Garware who has resigned as a director.
[No- F- 8/93/67-SB-l
* c -
8
Kew Delhi, the 1th December 1967
( i i ) ]
S.O. 43S1.—Statement of the Affairs of the Reserve Biak of India, ai on the 1st December 1967.
^ I
BANKING DEPARTMENT
H E
Rs.
Rs.
LIABILITIES
ASSETS
G A Z E T T E
34,50,02,000 Capital Paid Up
N o t es
,
5,00,00,000
O F
6,64,000
I
R u p ee C o in . . . . . . ..
N D
4,00,000
80,00,00,000
S m a ll C o in
Reserve Fund . . . . . . ..
I
A
:
B i l ls P u r c h a s ed a nd D i s c o u n t e d :—
(a) I n t e r n al , . . . . . ,.
131,00,00,000
National Agricultural Credit (Long Term Operations,! Fund .
D E C
.
1 P) E x t e r n al . . . . . . ..
1 6
,
25 7.3S.86,000
00 G o v e r n m e nt T r e a s u ry B i l ls ,
1 9 6 7
25,00,00,000
/ National Agricultural Credit (Stabilisation,! Fund
17,19.^0.000 186,0",6S ,000
B a l a n c es H e ld A b r o a d* . . . . . .. I n v e s t m e n t s ** . . . . . . ..
L o a n5; a nd A d v a n c es t o :—
30,00,00,000
( 1) C e n t r al G o v e r n m e nt . . . . ..
National Industrial Credit (Long Term Operations") Fund .
( u) S t a te G o v e r n m e n t s ®1 . . . ..
IO7,47>45.""
A G R A H A Y A N A 2 5
,
L o a ns a nd A d v a n c es t o :—
Deposits:—
7,43.25,000
(t) S c h e d u l ed C o m m e r c i al B a n k s ' )" . . ..
1 8 8 0
(a) S t a te C o - o p e r a t i ve B a n k sJ . . ..
i9?,69,4S,oco (a) Government
97,30,04,000
2,85,30,000
( i n) O t h e rs . . . . . . ..
(t; Central Government
4 5 9 9
4 6 0 0
Rs.
Rs.
ASSETS
LIABILITIES
T H E
Loans, Advances and Investments from National Agricultural (it) S t a te G o v e r n m e n ts . . . ..
4,33,79,000
Credit (Long T e rm Operations) Fund
(b) B a n ks
la) Loans and Advances to:—
28,13,31,000 ft) S c h e d u l ed C o m m e r c i al B a n ks . . ..
I4I>24,4 I ;OOO
(f,i State Governments . . . ..
G A Z E T T E
13,68-60,000 (if) S c h e d u l ed S l a te C r w p e r a t i ve B a n ks .
(it) State Co-operative Banks . . ..
5.92,69 O-DO
O F ( "0 N o n - S c h e d u l ed S t . i le C o - o p e r E t i ve B a n ks .
(iii) Central Land Mortgage Banks
9944,000
I
( i i| Si O t h er B a n ks . . . . . ..
10,3$,OOO
N D
\V) Investment in Central Land Mortgage Bank Deben- tures . . . . . . ..
7,46,99)°°°
I
A
Loans and Advances from National Agricultural Crtdit (c) Others
276,S6,09,0OO
:
(Stabilisation,! Fund
Bills Payable
43,S3,22,00O
8.29,75,000
Loans and Advances to State Co-operative Banks
D E C
.
62,56,00,000 Loans, Advances and Investments from National Industrial Other Liabilities
1 6
.
Credit (Long Term Operations; Fund
1
5,45,?4,0'0O
(L2J Loans and Advances to the Development Bink
%
7
/
\b'i Investment in bonds/debentures issued by the Deve- lopment Bank . . . . . ..
Other Assets . . . . . . ..
45>39349=°°°
Rupees
904,16,06,000
904,16,06,000 Rupees
A G R A H A Y A N A *Includes Cash and Short-term Securities.
2 5 '•Excluding Investments from the Natiom! Agricultural Credit (Long Term Operations) Fund and the National Industrial Credit (Long
,
Term Operations) Fund.
1 8 8 9 ©Excluding Loans and Advances from the National Agricultural Credit (Long Term Operations,! Fund, but including temporary overdraft? to
State Governments.
[ flncludes Rs. 70,00,000 advanced to scheduled commercial banks against usance bills under Section 17(41(0) of the R.B.I. Acl.
^Excluding Loins and Advances from the Nirional Agricultural Credit (L?n& Term Operations) Fund and the National Agricultural C/cdit (Stabi-
P A R T
lisation) Fund.
I I - Dated the 6th day of December 1967.
An A c c o u nt p u r s u a nt to t he Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, for t he week e n d ed t he 1st day of D e c e m b er 1967.
S E C
.
ISSUE D E P A R T M E NT
8
( i i ) ]
A S S E TS
R i. L I A B I L I T I ES
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
T H E
2 4 , 5 0 , 0 2 , 0 00
G o ld C om a nd B u l l i o n :—
Notes held in ihe Banking D e p a i i m c nt
115,89,25,000
(,i) H e ld in I n d ia . . ..
. 2962,7>},79.ooo
(b) H e ld o u t s i de I n d .a
Notes in circulation . . ..
166,42,00,000
F o r e i gn S e c u r i t i es . . . ..
G A Z E T T E
2 9 b 7 , 2 9J8 lJO 0O
Total N o t es issued . . ..
O F
I
- 282,31,25,000 79.9S,i8,ooo 262S;OO,38,OOO
N D
I
T O T AL . . . . .. R u p ee C om . . . . .. G o v e r n m e nt of I m l ia R u p ee S e c u r i t i es I n t e r n al H i l ls of E x c h a n ge a nd o t h er C o m- m e r c i al p a p er . . . ..
A
:
T O T AL A S S E TS
2987,29,81,000
29 - 7 , 2 9 , 8 1 ^ 0 00
T O T \L T.tAMLITlFS . . ..
D E C
.
Dated the 6th day of December 1967
1 0
,
L. K. JHA,
Governor.
[NolF.$3'(3)-BC/67.]
1 9 6 7
/
V. SWAMINATHAN, Under Secy.
A G R
\
H A V A N A
2 5
.
1 8 8 9
4 6 0 1
4<>O2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/ACRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART H-To be substituted in placr of tiu- Notification i
(Department of Economic Affairs)
(Office of the Controller of Capital Issues)
New Delhi, the 4th December 1967
S.O. 4382.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (i) of Section 5 ol the Capital Issues (Control) Act, 1947 (29 ol 1H47) the Central Government hereby exempts the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Limited, from the provisions of Section 3 and 5 of the said Act, In respect of Bonds of the value not exceeding the equivalent of $ 23,000,000 (Twent.v-flve million dollars) to be executed and delivered by the said Corporation to or on the order of the Inter- national Bank for Reconstruction and Development, in terms of the Loan Agree- ment, dated the 19th September, 19G7, entered into between the said two parties.
[No- R. 3.MCCI/67.]
M. K. VENKATACHALAM,
Controller of Capital Issues.
(Department of Revenue and Insurance)
ORDER
STAMPS
New Delhi, ttic 16fh December 1967
S.O. 4383.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause fa) of sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), the Central Govern- ment herey remits the duty with which the bonds to the value of one crore of rupees to be issued in 1967 by the Maharashtra State Financial Corporation are chargeable under the said Act.
[No. 14/67-F. No-. 1/75/67-Cus. VII-Stamps.]
M. S. SUBRAMANYAM, Under Secy.
OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, PATNA
Patna, the %th August 1967
S.O. 4384.—In exercise of the powers conferred on the under Rule 5 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, I hereby empower the officers mentioned in col. 4 of the table appended below to exercise the powers of the Collector of Central Excise under Rules mentioned m col. 3 thereof.
Nature of powers conferred on
Rule No. Collectors powers to be Collectors
delegated to SI. No.
I
2
3
4
96ZAm
Superintendent
To accept first A.S.P. application for full period for which special procedure can be availed of,
2
96ZA(a)
Do.
To accept first A-S.P. application for a period less than the prescribed period.
3
Assistant Collector
96ZA(3) -
SEC. 3(iJ)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA; DEC. IG, I9fi7/AGRi\HAYANA 25, 1889 46032
I
3
(a) To accept renewal applications in iorm
4
Superintendent
96ZA14)
4
A.S.P.
(6) To condone delay in submission of Do.
A.S.P- application for renewal.
To condone delay in submission of appli- (0 Superintendent, for con- doning delays not exceeding 15 days.
CM) Assistant Collector for condoning delays exceed- ing 5 days.
96(ZD)(2)
5
cation for removal in i'orm A. R. 10 and to condone delays in making monthly deposits.
•6 To impose following penalties for mis- dedaration etc.
((") to demand duty at full rate. (H) to confiscate goods (Hi) to impose penalty not exceeding (•"') Superintendent for con- doning delays not exceed- ing 5 days.
(iV) Assistant Collector if the delays exceeds the limits (0 above.
Adjudicating Officers in ac- cordance with their limits of powers.
96ZF (") "I
96ZF("j V
96ZFljv) J
Rs. 2000
[No. 4-CX/67] TILAK RAJ,
Collector,
OFFICE OF THE "Y. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, AMBIT SAB Amritsar, the 30th, November 1967
[Amendment to Notification issued under this office C. No. V(4)DC/15/l/CE/64/ 14040-77, dated 27th June, 19G7.J
S.O. 4385.—The exemption under Rules 15 and 16 pertains to whole of the Hamirpur sector which includes Hamirpur Tehsil and Dehra Gopipur TehsU.
[No. C-V.(4)DC/15/l/CE/64/25856.] N. N. ROY CHOUDHUHY, Dy. Collector.
46O4T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. Ifi, 1U67/AGRAHAYANA 23, 1889 [PART I I-MINISTRY OF COMMERCE
New Delhi, the HUi December 19H7
S.O. 4387.—The Central Government, having considered in consultation, with the Forward Markets Commission, the application for recognition mude under section 5 of the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1052 (74 of 1952) by the Vanaspati Manui'actureis' Association of India, Bombay, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, on the 13th June, 1067 with limited liability, and being satisfied that it would be m the interest of the trade and also in the public interest so to do, hereby grants, in exercise of the powers conferred by section fi of the said Act, recognition to the said Association for the period ending the i)th August, 1968, in respect of forward contracts in groundnut oil.
2. The recognition hereby granted is subject to the condition that the said Association shall comply with such directions as may from time to time be given by the Forward Markets Commission.
[No. 34(15)-CG(FMC)/67.]
K. C. SEKHARAN, Under Secy.
(Office of the Chief Controller of Imports & Exports)
ORDERS
New Delhi, the 13
S.O. 4388,—A licence No. P|RM|2I6072fi|C|XX|25|C]M|23-24|RM-l, dated 19th August 1967 at the value of Rs- 1,77,(115 00 lor import of ram materials as per Jist attached to the licence, was issued to M/s. Jaydeo Products (India), 119-D, Kabir Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur (Rajasthan),
2- Thereafter, a show cause notice No, 123/HQ/67/EnJ!/4439 dated 18th October 19G7 was issued usklng them to show cause within 10 days as to why the said licence in their favour should not he cancelled on the ground that the same was obtained on the basis of forged recommendation of D.G.T D. in terms of Clause 9(a).
3. The aforesaid show cause notice, was received back undelivered from the postal authorities with the remarks "Refused".
4- The undersigned has carefully examined the case and has come to the con- clusion that the party have avoided sending a reply.
5. Having regard to what has been stated in the preceding paragraph, the undersigned is satisfied that the licence in question should be cancelled or other- wise rendered ineffective Therefore, the undersigned, in exercise of the powers vested In him under Clause 9(a) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 hereby cancel the licence No- R/PM/216072fi/C/XX/25/C/23-:i4/RM-I dated 19th August 1967 for Rs, 1,77,815 00 issued in favour of M/s. Jaydeo Products (India), 119-D, Knblr Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
[No. 123/HQ/fi7/Enf.]'
New Delhi, the 1st December 19G7
S.O.'4389.—M/s. Western India Vegetable Products Ltd., Bombay were granted an Import licence No. P/RM/2157261/C/XX/24/C/H/23-24 dated the 27th February, 1967. They havo applied for issue of a duplicate Customs purposes copy of the licence for Rs. 46,500 (Rs. fortysix thousand and five hundred only) on the ground that the original Customs purposes copy of the licence has been misplaced.
In support of this contention, the applicant has filed an affidavit. I am satisfied that the original Customs Purposes copy of licence No- F/RM/2157261/C/XX/24/, C/H/23-24 dated the 27th February 19G7 has been misplaced and direct that a duplicate Customs purposes copy of the licence should be issued to the applicant. The original Customs purposes copy of the said licence is cancelled.
[No. Tollet/l(31)/AM67/RM3/3274.]
P. C. VERMA,
Dy. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports.
SEC 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4605(Office of the Chief Controller of Imports & Exports)
ORDERS New Delhi, the 13th November 1967
S.O. 4390.—A licence I\o. P/RM/21598'i7, dated 17th June 1067 of the value of.
Rs. 1,62,750.00 lor import of raw materials and spare parts as per list attached to the licence was issued to M/S. Steeiwyn Metal Works, Pipia House, Khutaiton-Ka- Rasta, Bishan Pole Bazar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Thereafter, a show cause notice No. 124/HQ/67/Enf/4565, dated 23rd October 1967 was issued asking them to show cause within ten (10) days as to why the said licence in their favour should not be cancelled on the ground that the same was obtained on the basis ot forged recommendation ot D-G.T.D. in terms of Clause 9(a).
3. The aforesaid show cause notice was received back undelivered from the postal authorities with the remarks "Left without address".
4 The undeisigned has carefully examined the case and has come to the conclusion that the party have no defence to urge and hence are avoiding a reply. ,
5. Having regard to what has been stated in the preceding paragraph, the undersigned is satisfied that the; licence in question should be cancelled or other- wise rendered ineffective. Therefore, tha undersigned, in exercise of the powers vested in him under Clause 9(a) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 hereby cancel the licence No- P/RM/2159877 dated 17th June 1907 for Rs. 1,62.750.00 iisued in favour of M/s Steeiwyn Metal Works, Pipla House. Khutaiton-Ka-Rasta, Bishan Pole Bazar, Jaipur (Rajasthan). To, M/s. Steeiwyn Metal Works, Pipla House, Khutaiton-Ka-Basta, Biebart Pole Bazar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
[No. 124/HQ/67/Enf.]
New Del'd, the 27th November 1967
S.O. 4391.—A licence No. P!RM'2157&15|C|XX|24|C|M:23-24,RM 1, dated 16th March 19S7 of the valr.p of Rs. 1.97.dl5 for import of raw materials and chemical? as tjer list attached to the licence was issued to M/s. Jaydeo Products (India), 119-D. Kabir Marg. Bani Park, Jaipur.
2. Thereafter, a show cause notice No. 123/HQ/67/Enf/5105. dated 13th Novem- ber 1967 was issued asking them to show cause within 10 days as to why the said licence in their favour should not be cancelled on the ground that the same was obtained on the basis of forged recommendation of D.G T.D. H terms of Clause 9, sub-clause (a).
3- The aforesaid show cause notice was received back undelivered from the Postal authorities with the remarks 'Refused'.
4. The undersigned has carefully examined the case and has come to the con- clusion that the licence in question was obtained on the basis of forged recom- mendation of D.G.T.D. and the firm haa avoided to send a reply to the show cause notice.
5. Having regard to what has been stated in the preceding paragraph, the undersigned is satisfied that the licence in question should be cancelled or other- wise rendered ineffective. Therefore, the —- 7 - -i - * " • .'icercise of the powers vested in him under Clause 9. sub-Clause ( • • • (Control) Order, 1955 herebv carrel the Licence Nr>, P/RM/21: • '• ' /M/23-24/RM1 dated 16th March 1967 for Rs. 1.97.815
[No- 123/HQ/67/Enf/5446.]
B. D. BHATTACHARYA,
Dy. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, for Chief Controller of Imports and Exports.
(Office of the Chief Controller of Imports & Exports) ORDER New Delhi, the 29th November J967
S.O. 4392,- The S-E. (Planning). Project Section, Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala were granted an import licence No. G/AU/1001505/x/xx/18/c/h-18
4606 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 1C, 19G7/AGK.AHAYANA 25, 1889 [1'ART I I-dated 27th November, 1HH3. for Rs. 2G.960/- (Rupees Twenlysix Thousand, Nine hundred and Sixty only). They have applied for the issue of a duplicate Ex- change Control copy of the said licence on the ground that the original Exchange Control Copy has been lost/misplaced. It is further stated that the original Ex- change Control Copy was registered with the Customs authorities at Bombay. It was not utilised.
2. In support of this contention, the applicant has fiVed an affidavit on two rupees stamped paper duly attested by Notary Public, Delhi dated 10th October 1967, I am accordingly satisfied that the original Customs purposes/Exchange Control Purposes copy of the said licence has been lost. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under Sub-clause 9fee;) of the Imports fControl) Order 1955 dated 7th December, J955 as amended, the said original Exchange Control Purposes copy of Licence No. G/AU/ 10()l505/x/xx/l8A7h-l8 dated 27th November 1963, issued to The S,E. (Planning) Project Sectiun, Punjab State Electricity - Board, Patiala is hereby cancelled,
3. A duplicate Exchange Control Purposes copy of the said licence has been issued separately to the licensee.
[No. 2/SG/661/63-64/PLS.]
S. A. SESHAN,
Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports.
MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & COMPANY AFFAIRS
(Department of Industrial Development)
New Delhi, the 1th December 1967
S.O. 4393. 29/B/IDRA/61'.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (i) of section 29B of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (65 of 1951) the Central Government hereby makes the following amendment to the notification of the Government of India in the late Ministry of Industry No. S.O. 3729 (2SVB/IDRA/66), dated the 29th November 1966, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the 10th December, 1966, namely:
In the Said notification, for item (ii) of the proviso, the following item shall be substituted, namely: —
"No additional expenditure of foreign exchange is involved except for the import of raw materials where the diversified product is a 'prio- rity' industry, as notified in the Public Notice issued by the Govern- ment of India in the Ministry of Commerce No. 93-ITC(PN)/66, dated the 28th June, 1966. published at page 932 to 935 of the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I—Section I, dated the 28th June, 1966".
[No. a(14)/Lic.Pol./66.]
R. C. SETHI, Under Secy.
(Department of Industrial Development)
ORDER
New Delhi, the 8th. December 1H67
S.O. 4394.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 6 of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act 1951, read with Rules 2, 4, and 5 of the Development Councils (Procedural) Kules 1952; the Central Government hereby appoints Shrl K. R. Ganesh, M.P. to be a member, upto the 24th October 1968, of the Development Council established for a period of two years by the order • of the Government of India in the Ministry of Industry No. SOP/DC/I/66, dated the 25th October, 1966, for the scheduled industry engaged in the manufacture
SEC, 3(11)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, I967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4607or production of Paper, Pulp and Allied Industries, and directs that the amend- ment shall be made in the said order, namely:
In the said order, after the entry No. 29, the following entry shall be made namely;—
30 Shri K. R. Gancsh, M.P. 107, South Avenue, New Delhi-11.
[No. F. LI(lII)-17(154j/66-Dev, Council.]
V. PRAKASH, Under Secy.
(Department of Industrial Development)
(Indian Standards Institution)
New Delhi, the 1st December 10H7
S.O. 4395.—In licence No. CM/L-1380, dated 30 December, 196fi held by M/s Mahendra Electncals Ltd, Nadiad, the details of which are published under SO- 24:j In the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-Snctlon 3(ii>, dated 21 January, 1967, the following types of polythene insulated and PVC sheathed cables conforming to IS- 159(3-1962, have been included with effect from 27 November, lWfi7:
(i) Flat twin cables with or without earth continuity conductor with alumi- nium conductors: and
(ii) Circular three-core cables with aluminium conductors.
[No- MD/55: 1381-1
(Dr.) SADGOPAL. Deputy Director Gene-
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT & SHIPPING
(Transport Wine)
Mi.acHANT SHIPPING
New Delhi, the 1st December 1967
S.O. 4396,—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (I) of section 7 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (44 of JD5U), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri K. C. Madappa as Director General of Shipping, Bombay, with effect from the forenoon of 6th November 19H7, vice Shri Govind H- Seth who reverted a.s Additional Director General of Shipping.
[No. l-MA(43)/67.]
K. V. SANKARAN, Dy. Secy.
MINISTRY OF WORKS, HOUSING & SUPPLY
(Department of Supply)
ORDER
New Delhi, the 23rd November 1967
S,O. 4397.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (2) of Rule ]2 and sub-rule (1) of Rule 24 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, ]')tjfj the President is pleased to direct that in the Deoartmental proceedings ngainst Shri Babu Ram a Foreman in the Office of the Director of Inspection (Met.). Burnpur a regional office of the Directorate General of Supplies & Disposals, the Deputy Director Geneial (Inspection) at the Headquarters of the Directorate General of Supplies fr Disposals and the Directorate General of Sup- plies and Disposals shall be the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority, respectively-
[No, F. K58V67-V.T
S- S. PURL Director (VigilanceX
.4608 THE GA7ETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16. 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING
ORDER
New Delhi, the 2nd December 1967
S.O. 4398 In pursuance of the directions issued under the provisions of the enactments specified in the First Schedule annexed hereto the Central Government after considering the re- commendations of the Film Advisory Boird, Bombay hereby approves the film specified in column 2 of the Second Schedule annexed hereto in allits language versions to be of the description speci- fied against it in column 6 of the said Second Schedule.
THE FIRST SCHEDULE
(1) Sub-Section (4) of the Section 12 and Section 16 of the Cinematograph Act 1932 ^Central Act XXXVII of 1952).
(2) Sub-Section (3) of Section 5 and Section 9 of the Bombay Cinemas ^Regulation) Act 1953 (Bombay Act XI of 1953).
(3) Sub-section (4I of Section 5 and Section 9 of die Saurashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953 (Saurashtra Act XVII of 1953).
THE SECOND SCHEDULE
Title of the film
N^nv: of the
Longth 35mm
Producer
Nam'.- of the
Applicant
si. No.
Whether a scientific film or a film intended for educational pur- poses or a film deal- ing with news and current events or documentary film
6 1
2
3
5
4
1
295 M
Mi'iaiasht/-i NVws
Director of Publici- v Government of Maharashtra. Bombay -34.
No. 186.
Film dealing with news and currert events (For release in M-iharcs'itra Circuit only).
[No. F. 24/1/67'FP App. 1220). -j
BANU RAM AGGARWAL Under Secy.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
(Cultural Activities Division I)
[CAI(l) Section]
ARCHAEOLOGY New Delhi, the 24th November 1967
S.O. 4399.—Whereas the Central Government ;a of opinion that the ancient monuments specified in the Schedule attached hereto are of national importance.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (24 of 1958), the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to declare the said ancient monuments to be of national importance.
Any objection made within two months from the date of publication of this notification in the official Gazette by anv person interested in the said ancient monuments will be considered by the Central Government.
' T HE SCHEDULE5
S E C
.
3
Ownership Remarks
Boundaries
Locality
Area
Name of Monuments Revenue plot
District Tahsil
( i i ) ] Serial No.
Union Territory
rumbei to be incli'ded vrc'er protection.
T H E
11
10
6
1
2
8
3
7
9
4
1
G
G A Z E T T E
O F
I
N D
I
A
:
D E C
.
1 6
, ,
1 9 6 7
/
T
A G R A H A Y A N A
2 5
,
1 8 8 9
4 6 0 9
4 6 1 0
I
10
11
7
S
2
6
3
4
9
5
T H E
Goa
North:— Old road
2
Government. F.oads are Ella Goa.
Velha Goa.
Goa, Daman and Dm.
2S56C sq. mm.
Church of Sr. Augustine together with adjacent land comprised in part of survev plot Nos. 187 and iSS."
Part of survey plot Nos. 187 and I?S as shewn in the plan repro- duced below.
not assig- ned any survey numbers.
G A Z E T T E
O
f
1
East :—Remain- ing portion of survey plot Nos. 187 and iSS. South:—Road. Wesr:—Road.
I
N D
I
A Do.
Do. Do.
Do.
North:—Remain-
?
:
ing portion of
942 sq. mets.
survey plot No. 239.
D E C
.
Roadi are not assig- ned any survey number.
Survey plot Xo. 238 and part of Survey plot No. 239 as Ehov,n in the plan repro- duced below.
Survey plot ; No. 239: pri- vate and re- maining Government owned.
Portal remains, of St. Paul's college together with adjacent land comprised in survey plot "No. 23S and part of survey plot Xo. 239.
1 6
,
1 9 6 7
/
East:—Road. South:—Road. West:—Remain- ing portion of survey plot No. 239.
GH
North:—Paniim Trustees Ella
Group of monuments
•i
Bangue- nim
Goa
namely:—
Survey pto: No. 19.
7932 Ml- mets.
&u, Daman and Diu
road and survey plot No. 17.
A G R A H A Y A N A
East:—Road and
2 5
,
Survey plot Nos. 17 & 18.
Church of lady of Rosary together with adjacent area comprised in sur- vey plot No. 19.
1 8 8 9
South:—Survey plot Nos. 20 aod 21.
[
P A R T
West:—Survey plot No. 21.
I I -
*
w
;
3
( i i
> J
T H E
G A Z E T T E
O V
I
N D
I
A
:
D E C
.
1 6
,
1 9 6 7
/
A G R A
I /
A V A N A
2 5
,
t f i
U
9
[No. F.4, i7-CAI(l).]
4 6 1 1
4612 T HE GAZETTI-OF IMOIA : DEC. lfc, 1&67/AGAAHAYANA 25, 1889" [PART 11^-New Delhi, the 4th December 1967
S.O. 4400.—Whereas the Central Government la of opinion that the ancient monument specified in the Schedule attached hereto is of national importance.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Aet, 1953 (24 of 1958), the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to declare the said ancient monument to be of national importance.
Any objection made within two months from the date of publication of this J\Totincation in the Official Gazette by any person Interested in the said ancient monument will be considered by the Central Government.
'
THE ScHEfiutt
S E C
.
S
Locality
Area
Boundaries
Tehsil
Name of monument
State District
Ownership Remarks
( i i ) ] Serial No.
Revenue plot numbers to be included under protec- tion
T H E
Bahapur
Mehrauli
Delhi
I. Delhi
North ; Remaining 'portion of survey plot No. 600
Land and Hous- ing Develop- ment.
14 Bighas and 7.8 Biswas.
G A Z E T T E
Part of survey plot No. 6oo as shown on the plan re- produced below.
Ashokan rock edict to- gether with adjacent area comprised in part of survey plot No. 6oo as shown on the plan reproduced below.
O F
East : Remaining portion of survey plot No. 600
I
N D
I
A
:
South : Remaining portion of survey plot No. 600
D E C
.
1 6
West : Remaining portion of survey plot No. 600.
,
1 9 6 7
/
A G R A H A V A N A
2 5
,
1 8 3 9
4 6 1 ^
[No. F.4/IZ/67-CAK
SHARDA RAO (MRS.),
Assistant Educational Advl:
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16. 1967/AGRA-UAYANA 25, 1S89 4615MINISTRY OF LABOUR, EMPLOYMENT & REHABILITATION
(Department of Labour and Employment)
New Delhi, the 23rd November 1967
8-0- 4401—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 73F of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having regard to the location of the Government Press and Stationery Stores, Kolhapur, In an imple- mented area exempts the said Press 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 1st December, 1967.
LNo. F. 6(51)/86-HL]
New Delhi, the 2Uh November 1967
S.O. 4402.—Whereas Messrs. Bombay Company (Private) Limited, 91-Wallace Street, Fort, Bombay-1, (hereinafter referred to as the said establishment) has applied for exemption under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952);
And whereas in the opinion of the Central Government, the rules of the provi- dent fund of the said establishment with respect to the rates of contribution are not less favourable to the employees therein than those specified in section 6 of the said Act, and the employees are also in enjoyment of other provident fund benefits which on the whole are not leas favourable to the employees than the benefits provided under the said Act or under the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme. 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme) in relation to the employees in any other establishment of a similar character;
Now, therefore, In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) uf sub-section (1) of section 17 of the said Act, and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the Bald estab- lishment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme and in pur- suance of sub-section (3) of the said section 17, the Central Government hereby directs that,—
(a) the employer in relation to the said establishment shall pay within fifteen days of the close of the month to the Employees' Provident Fund, inspection charges at the rate ol 0.09 per cent (zero point zero nine per cent) of the pay (basic wages, clearness allowance, retaining allowance, if any, and cash value of food concession admissible thereon) for the time being payable to the employees of the said establishment who would have become members under the said Scheme but for this exemption:
(b) the said employer shall Invest the provident fund contributions in accord- ance with the directions issued by the Central Government from time to time.
THE SCHEDULE
1. The employer shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner as the Central Government may, from time to time, prescribe.
2. The employer shall furnish to each employee an Annual Statement of
Account or Pass Book-
3. All expenses involved in the administration of the Fund Including the maintenance of accounts, submission of accounts and returns, transfer of accumulations, payment of Inspection charges etc., shall be borne by the employer.
4. The employer shall display on the Notice Board of the establishment a copy of the Rules of the Fund as approved by the appropriate Gov- ernment and, as and when amended, alongwlth a translation of the salient points thereof In the language of the majority of the employees. 5. Where an employee who Is already member of the Employees' Provident Fund (Statutory Fund) or the Provident Fund of another exempted establishment is employed In his establishment, the employer shall Immediately enrol him as a member of the Fund of the establishment, and accept the past accumulations in respect of such employee and credit to his account-
A6l6 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/ACRAHAYANA 25, 188" [PART II—6. The employer shall enhance the rate of provident fund contribution ap- propriately if the rate of provident fund contributions ior ihe class of establishments In which his establishment falls is enhanced under the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 so that the benefits under the provident fund Scheme of the establishment shall not become less favourable than the benefit provided under the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952.
7. The establishment shall submit an audited balance sheet of its provident fund every year to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner within 3 months of the close qf the year.
8. No amendment of the Rules of the Provident fund shall be made without the previous approval of the Regional Provident Fund On mlssioner. Where any amendment is likely to affect adversely the Interests of the employees, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner shalL before giving his approval, give a reasonable opportunity to the emp- loyees to explain their point of view.
[No, 11/23/66-PF.ILJ
New Delhi, the 25th November 1967
S.O. 44(13.—In exercise of the powers conferred bv section 78F of the Emplo- yees' State Insurance Act, 1848 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having regard to the location of the factory in an implemented area, hereby exempts the Central Asphalt Plant.Egmore, Madras, belonging to the Corporation of Madras from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under chapter VA of the said Act for a further period upto and including the 19th November, 1968-
[No. F. 0/71/67-HL]
New Delhi, the 1st December 1967
S.O. 4404,—In exercise qf the powers conferred by section 73F of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having regard ta the location of the factory In an implemented area, exempts the Government Pressv Shoranur, from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act for a further period of one yeaT with effect from the 10th December, 1987-
[No- F. 6(76)/67-HI-I
S.O. 4405.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 73F of the Em- ployees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having regard to the location of the factory in an implemented area, hereby exempts the Central Dairy, Government Milk Supply Scheme, Poona. 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 8th December, 1967.
[No- F. 6(77)/67-HI.J
S.O. 4406.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 73F of the Em- ployees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government, having- regard to the location of the factories mentioned In the Schedule below In sparse areas in the State of Maharashtra, hereby exempts them from the payment of the employer's special contribution leviable under Chapter VA of the said Act until the enforcement of the provisions of Chapter V of the said Act in these areas-
SCHEDTJLE
Name of District
Name of Arew
Name of the factory SI. No.
i.
Akola
Malegoan
2.
Yeotmal
Wani
M/s Banshilal Rampratap' Oil Mill, Tahsil Washim. M/s Bashir Oil Mills,
Bazar ^ard,
[No. F. 6(12)/66.HL?
9E^. 3(u)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 18, 1967/AGRAHAYANA ?3, 1389 4617New Delhi, the 2nd December 19fi7
SO. 4407.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 1 of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), the Central Govern- ment hereby rescinds the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, Employment & Rehabilitation (Department oC Labour and Employment) No. S O. 2544 dated the 21st July, 1967.
[No. 8/78/67/PF.II.]
8-0. 4408.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 5D of the Employees' Provident Funds Act. 1952 (19 of 1952). and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, Employ- ment and Rehabilitation No S-O. 579 dated the 13th February, 10fi7, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri B. N. Raval as Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner for the whole of the State of Maharashtra and the union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu to assist the Central Provident Fund Commissioner in the discharge of his duties.
2- This notification shall be deemed to have tome in^o force on 13th November, 1967-
[No. 17(80)/65-PF-I(ii).]
S.O. 4409--—In exercise of the powe.'s conferred by sub-setvtion (1) of section 13 of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) and In supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, Employ- ment and Rehabilitation No- S.O 580, dated the 13th February, UtG7. the Central Government hereby appoints Shri B. N. Raval to he an Inspector for the whole of the State of Maharashtra and the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu for the purposes of the said Act and ot any Scheme framei thereunder, in rela- tion to establishments belonging to, or under the control of, the Central Govern- ment, or In relation to establishments connected with a railway company, a major port, a mine or an oil-field, or a controlled industry.
LNo. 17(80)/65-PFI(lii)-]
New) Delhi, the 4th December 1967
S.O. 4410.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employer and the majority of the employees In relation to the establishment known as Messrs. Victory Mica Limited) P.O. Jhumcrltelaiya (Hazaribagh) Bihar State have agreed that the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), should be made applicable to the said establishment;
Now, therefore, In exercise of the powers conferred by Kub-section (4) of section 1' of the said Act, the Central Government hereby applies the provisions of the said Act to the said establishment.
ThlB notification shall come into force on the 1st day of December, 1987-
[No 8(4)66-PF.IL]
S.O. 4411.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employer and the majority of the emnloyoes in relation to the establishment known as Messrs. BKI Foundries Udyambag P.O. Khanapur Road, Belgaum have agreed that the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1C62), should be made applicable to the said establishment;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by £.ub-sectlon (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 31st day of October, 1947.
[tto. 8/139/G7-PF.IL1
SO. 4412.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that the employer and the majority of the employees in relation to the establishment known as Messrs- the Ex-servicemen M.T. Co-operative Society Limited, Kapurthala. have agreed that the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 cf 19K>y should be made applicable to the said establishment;
46i8 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-Now, therefore, In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) ol 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 clay of September 19fi6.
[No. 8(31)67PF.II.]
MAHINDRA KISHORE, Under Secy.
(Department of Labour and Employment)
New Delhi, the 23rd November 1987
S.O. 4413.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (60 of 1952), the Central Government hereby makes the follow- ing further amendments in the notification of the Government of India In the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation (Department of Labour and Employment) No- S.O, 2286, dated the 4th July, 1967, namely:—
In the said notification, in the second paragraph,—
(a) for the portion beginning with the brackets, figure and words "(1) the number of surplus workmen" and ending with the words "and on the fiame date in subsequent years", the following shall be substituted, namely:—"(1) the number of surplus workmen (including officers if any, on the rolls of the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Limited, Burmah-Shell Refineries Limited, Eombay, Ksso Standard Eastern Limited, Esso Standard Refining Company of India Limited, Bombay, Caltex (India) Limited and Caltex Oil Refining (India) Limited, Visakhapatiiam as on the let January, 1960 and on the same date in subsequent years;";
(b) for the brackets, figure and words "(5) the extent to which the said methods", the brackets, figure and words "(5) the extent to which the said methods, plans and schemes" shall be substituted;
(c) for the brackets, figure and words "(6) if any of the methods adopted", the brackets, figure and words "(6) If any of the methods, plan and schemes adopted" shall be substituted.
[No. 17/10/66/LRIV.]
S.O. 4414.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1047 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Madras in the industrial dispute between the employers Jn relation to Messrs. Ruby General Insurance Company Limited, Madras and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on the 21st November, 1967-
BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, MADRAS
Tuesday, the 31st day of October, 1&67.
(9th day of Kartika, 1889—Saka)
PRESENT;
Thiru M. Tajammul Hussain, B.A..B.L.,—Industrial Tribunal,
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO, 5B or 1967
(In the matter of the dispute between the workmen and the Management of Messrs. Ruby General Insurance Co., Ltd-, Madras-2).
BETWEEN:
Shri K. Srinivasan, Np. 5- A, E. Block, Foreshore Estate, Santhome, Madraa- 28.
ANB
The Regional Manager, Messrs. Ruby General Insurance Co. Ltd. Khivaraj Mansion, No. 150-A, Mount Road, Madras-2.
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1389 4619.REFERENCE: —
Government of India order No. 70/10/67 LR. Ill dated 26th Ju'y, 1967, Department of Labour and Employment, Ministry of Labour, Emnloy ment and Rehabilitation, Government of India, New Delhi.
This dispute coming for final hearing on Friday, the 27th day of October, 1967, •upon perusing the reference. Claim and Counter statements and all other material papers on record and upon hearing the arguments of Thiru K. Srinivasan, Ex- stenographer of M/s. Ruby General Insurance Company Ltd., Madras, appearing for himself and of Thiru M. R. Narayanaswamy, Advocate, Madras appearing for the Management, and this dispute having stood over titl this day for considera- tion, this Tribunal made the following.
AWARD
This is a reference by the Central Government regarding the transfer of Sri .K. Srinivasan, from Madras to Cochin on the 1st November, 1965, by the manage- ment of Messrs Ruby General Insurance Company Limited, Madras and the termi- nation of his services with effect from the 20tn January, 1966.
2. The matter referred to this Court for adjudication is as set out in the .sched^e to the reference and it is as follows: —
''Whether the transfer of Shri K- Srinivasan, stenographer from Madras to Cochin on the 1st November, 1965, by the Management of Messrs. Ruby General Insurance Company Limited Madras and the termina- tion of his services with effect from the 20th January, 1966, were justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled and from what date?"
3- Claim statement was filed by Sri K- Srinivasan, and the material allegations in the statement are these:—Sri K. Srinivasan joined M/s. Ruby General Insur- ance Co., Ltd., Madras as a stenographer on 16th August, 1962. At the time of his joining, there were no standing orders and things were done as per practice in vogue. The company does not have pay scales. After completion of probation he approached the management to give him the increment due- The management refused on the ground that the company had no pay scale. The matter was .referred to the General Manager and also to the Board of Directors of the com- pany. Then the matter was referred to Central Labour Court, Madras and a decision was given in favour of the petitioner. Prom that date onwards the management began to harass the petitioner and transferred him to Cochin. The -management granted him leave from 2nd November, 1965, to 11th November, 1965, and for the subsequent period leave was refused. He was placed under suspen- sion and a domestic enquiry was conducted on 18th December, 1965, and he was discharged from service on 20th January, 1966. He was charged for disobeying the order of transfer dated 1st November, 1965, and for not appearing before the •doctor appointed by them. The management deliberately combined the trannfer and also the leave salary and refused to pay him the salary due to him for Novem- fcer, 1965. The transfer was mala fide. The management was not justified in •directing the petitioner to appear before the doctor appointed by them as there •was no condition or stipulation to that effect. It is prayed that the petitioner should be reinstated with back wages and also the leave salary for November 1965, should be paid to him.
4 The management filed a counter statement traversing the allegations made in the claim statement. According to the counter statement, the petitioner was appointed as a stenographer by order dated 25th August, 1962, effective from 16th August, 1962. He was to be a probationer for a period of one year from 16th August, 1962. One of the terms of service is as follows:
"All the staff rules of the company as per separate typed sheets attached hereto and/or amendments now in force and/or in future form part of this appointment and you will have to abide by the same".
5 The petitioner was working in the Madras office till 1st November 1965 on which date he was transferred to the Cochin District Office and he was directed to report to duty at Cochin Office on or before 8th November. 1965. He was also informed that he would be paid single third class fare for his journey to Cochin plus a daily bata of Rs. 8 during the period of journey. He was notified that he would be paid a transfer allowance of Rs. 30 per month while he is at Cochin. His basic salary was fixed at Rs. ]45 and the dearness allowance of Rs. 115 Instead of obeying the s&id orders the petitioner questioned the right of the Regional Manager to transfer him. He also complained that granting third class fare
4620 T HE GAZETTE OF INPIA : DEC. 16, 1&67/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-amountcd to disgracing him and requested the management to revoke the order of transfer. The management refused to revoke the order of transfer.
6 The petitioner then applied for leave. He was informed by the management that privilege leave was granted till 11th November, 1965, on the expiry of which he was to join duty at Cochin. He was also informed that if he were to apply for any extension of leave on medical grounds he should produce a medical certi- ficate from a Doctor who would be appointed by the respondent. The petitioner again, by an application dated 11th November, 1B65, applied for extension of leave. The respondent requested the Superintendent of the Government Royapettah Hospital to examine the petitioner in connection with his application for exten- sion of leave and this was also dulv intimated to the petitioner. He declined to present himself before iho Superintendent of the Government Royapettah Hospi- tal. He did not obey the order of transfer, A#ain on 21st November, 1965, he applied for extension of medical leave supported by a certificate from the same Doctor who gave him the earlier two certificates.
7. The management framed the following charges against the petitioner (1) refusal to obey the orders of transfer; and (2) refusal to obey the order to appear before the Superintendent, Government Royapettah Hospita1, A domestic enquiry was held into the charges framed by the respondent against the petitioner. The enquiry officer found the petitioner guilty of both the charges, but at the same time, recommended that an apportunity be given to the petitioner to carry out the orders of transfer and that if he complied with the same and gave an under- taking about his future good behaviour, he might be let off with a nominal line- Instead of utilising the opportunity, the petitioner refused to obey the order of transfer, but Stated that if the respondent was prepared to continue his service at Madras office, he was willing to join forthwith. Since the petitioner failed to comply with the order of transfer, and as the charges framed against him were proved, his services were terminated by the order dated 20th January, 1966.
8. The issue for consideration is the matter referred to this tribunal for adjudi- cation and it is as follows: —
"Whether the transfer of Sri K. Srlotvasan. Stenographer from Madras to Cochin on the 1st November, 1965, by the management of Messrs. Ruby General Insurance Company Limited, Madras and the termina- tion of his services with effect from the 20th January, 1966, were justified? if not, to what relief is the workman entitled to and from what date?."
J 0. No oral evidence was adduced. Documents were marked by consent by the parties. Arguments were adduced. Ex. M. 1 is the office copy of the appoint- ment order issued to Mr. K. Srlnivasan. Ex. Ml Ca) is the endorsement made by the petitioner, agreeing to accept the appointment and abide by the terms and conditions of the appointment. Ex. M. 2 is the communication from Mr, K. Sri- nivasan agreeing to accept and abide by the terms and conditionK of service. Ex. M. 3 is the order transferring Mr. K. Srinivasan to Cochin. Ex. M. 4 is the letter of Sri K- Srinivasan, requesting the management to revoke the order of transfer- Ex. M. 5 is the reply from the management to Sri K. Srinivasan stating that under the terms of his employment, the management was entitled to transfer him to any of their branches and the order of the management should bo obeyed. Then the petitioner produced a medical certificate Ex. M. 6. Ex, M. 7 is the leave applica- tion from the petitioner. Ex, M. 8 is the office order granting leave to Mr. K, Srinivasan from 2nd November, 1965, to 11th November, 1965. Ex. M. 9 is an- other leave application sent by K. Srinivasan with medical certificate. Ex. M. 10 is a letter directing the petitioner to appear for medical examination before the Superintendent and Surgeon VII District Royapettah Hospital, either on Thursday 18th November, 1965, or on Friday 19th November, 1965, between 10 A.M. and 12 Jioon. Ex. M. 11 is the letter from Mr. K. Srinivasan to the management. Ex M 12 is the reply from the management. Ex- M. 13 is leave application of the petitioner and Ex M. 13(a) is medical certificate. Charge-sheet Ex M 21 was filed against Sri K. Srinivasan. Ex, M. 22 is the explanation to the charges Then there was an enquiry. Ex. M. 28 is the oral evidence recorded by Mr. C. R Rao (Enquiry Officer) at the domestic enquiry. Ex. M. 29 is the report of the Enquiry Officer.
10- The last paragraph of the report is as follows:—
"Now I come to the question of punishment to be recommended. I agree that in accordance with the findings, the only punishment that could be recommended is discharge from service. But in this case, I cam©
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1%7/AGRAlIAYANA 25, 1889 4621to the conclusion that the worker is misguided placing too much re- liance on his legal rights rather than responsibilities. I recommend that an opportunity to show better record of himself may be given to him if he carried out the orders of transfer and gives an under- taking as to his future good behaviour and conduct to the satis- faction of superiors- In that case a nominal fine will meet the end* of justice.".
Ex. M, 31 is a letter from Company enclosing the findings of the Enquiry Officer. Ex. M- 32 is the reply of Mr. Srlnlvasan to the findings of the Enquiry Officer. Ex. M- 33 is the order terminating the services of Mr. Srlnivasan.
11. On behalf of the petitioner, the oriulnal appointment order was marked as. Ex. W. 1- It does not contain the endorsement found in Ex. M. 1. Ex. W. 2 is the certified copy of order of the Central Government Labour Court at Madras. Ex. W. 3 is the letter addressed to the Central Government to take action against the management and recover money due to him as per the- Central Government Labour Court- Ex W. 5 is the order passed by the Labour Court in C.P. No. 29 of 19G5. Ex- W. ft is the letter from the company refusing to pay the December salary. Ex. W. 7 is the notice given by the Court in C.P. No. 30 of 19G5 ordering the respondent to pay the December salary- Ex. W. 8 is the order passed in C.P. No, 113 of 1967 by the Central Government Labour Court Madras to pay 1963 Bonus to the petitioner. Ex. W. 9 is the letter from the Com- missioner of Labour, Madras addressed to Srinivasan.
12. From the endorsement Ex. M. 1 (a) it is clear that the petitioner accepted the appointment and agreed to abide by the terms and conditions of the employ- ment- Ex. M. 2 is a letter signed by the petitioner and that letter contains the conditions of service of the company which the petitioner agreed to abide Para No. 5 is as follows:—"I shall be bound to observe all the stall' rules and other rules of the office discipline, which are now in existence or which mav from time to time be framed hereafter."
Para No. 2 is as follows: —
"The Company is entitled to transfer mo to any of its branches or to any- other p'ace, according to its rules and practice now and heretofore". 13. The learned advocate for respondent relied on the decision of the Supreme
y n h ° ^rt ?f I n d la in Syndicate Bank Ltd. and its workmen [in 1966 (1) L L-J at Dace 440] [That case related to the transfer of a clerk in Syndicate Bank in The Viia yawada branch to Bansanapalll on the same scale of pay and allowance A dis- pute was raised with reference to the said order of transfer and a reference was Art T h ^ J ^ ™ ™ ™ , ?* ° V ^m m,l d er ^c l ( ) ( 1) °f t he Industrial Disputes Act The Tribunal held that the order of transfer was prompted by mala tide considerations and set aside the order],
It has been held "There is no doubt that the banks are entitled to decide on a consideration of the necessities of banking business whether the transfer of an employee should be made to a particular branch There ia also no doubt that the management is in the best position to judge how to distribute its employees between the different branches. We are, therefore, of opinion that the industrial tribunals should be very careful before they interfere with the orders made by the banks m the discharge of their managerial functions It is true that if an order of transfer is made mala fide or for some ulte- lior purpose like punishing an employee for his trade union activities the industrial Tribunals should interfere and set aside such an order because the mala fids exercise of power is not considered Wai r r^ ? \h% ?°IT"T - ?ut ,t he , flndinR of ™I(l W" should *l£ reached by Industrial Tribunals only if there Is sufficient and proper evidence in support of the findings. Such a finding should not be has°doneC!n thi s°" °n flimSy *r o u n ds as t he Industrial Tribunal
,. xf- Analysing the evidence, it was held that the finding of the tribunal that
himself for duty at Cochin in view of the present high cost of living at Cochnf That order indicates the emoluments of the petitioner durinK his stay at Coch n' ?TT ^ ?S d i/e c t ed ^0 work m the Cochin District Office. He was also offered sinrie III Class fare on his journey to Cochin plus a Batta of Rs. 8 per day for a S d" of five days from the date hG stated from Madras. There was no reduction hr
4 6 2 2T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-pay but there was only an increase in the pay in view of the high cost of living in that place.
16- There is no material to hold that the transfer was made mala fide or with some ulterior purpose of punishing the petitioner for any trade Union activities. It is for the company to decide on a consideration of the necessities of the com- pany's business whether the transfer of an employee should be made to a parti- cular branch. There is also no doubt that the management is in the best position to judge how to distribute its employees between the different branches, The En- quiry Officer recommended that an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to show Detter record of himself and that if he carried out the orders of transfer and gives an undertaking as to his future good and conduct to the satisfaction of superiors a nominal fine was sufficient. The management in their letter (Ex, M. 31) informed the petitioner that m view of the recommendation of leniency by the Enquiry Officer, the management was prepared to drop charge No. 1 in the event ol his signifying that he was agreeable to join duty at Cochin within eight days from the date of receipt of this letter and if he failed to intimate to the management within four days from the date of receipt of this letter the fact that he was duly obeying the orders of transfer he was called upon to show cause within a fortnight from the date of receipt of the letter why he should not be discharged from service on the basis of the findings of the Enquiry Officer on each one of the _two charges. The company also informed the petitioner that his absence without leave from 12th November, 1965 would be treated as on loss of pay, Ex. M. 32 is the reply of the petitioner to which he stated thus: —
"1 reiterate that the orders of transfer which you say I have disobeyed has not been passed out of bona fides, and in fact a punishment inflicted on me for various reasons which you already know, I am therefore not prepared to accept your so called concession in asking me to report at Cochin Office within 15 days' time. If you are prepared to continue my services at Madras office, I am willinR to join forthwith. Please inform me,".
17. As the management was in the best position to judge how to distribute its employees between the different branches, and as the petitioner did not carry out the orders of the company, the company was justified in terminating the services of the petitioner. In the circumstances my finding on the issue is that the trans- fer of Shri K. Srinivasan, Stenographer from Madras to Cochin on the 1st Novem- ber, 1965, by the management of Messrs Ruby General Insurance Company Limit- ed, Madras and the termination of his services with effect from the 20th January, 1966 are justified and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.
18. An award is passed in terms of my findings on the issue. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.
Sd./- M. TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN,
Industrial Tribunal.
List of witnesses examined
for the Workman:— "\ for the Management: / NONE.
List of documents marked,
for the Workman: —
W i/ . . . . Appointment order dated 25-8-62.
*w"2/ • • . . Certified copy of order No. 1/65 dn 7-7-65 of The Central
Government Labour Court at Madras.
W 3/ . . . Letter dated 9-8-65 addressed to the Central Govt., to take action
against the Management and recover the money due to the work-
man as per order No. 1/65 dt. 7-7-65.
^ 4/ • • • . Notice ofthe Central Govt. Labour Court, Madras dated 3-12-65.
w 5/ • . - Order passed by the Labour Court in C.P. No. 29/65 dated 18-2-66.
W 6/ . . . Ruby General Insurance Co. Ltd., Madras-2 letter dated 29-12-65
refusing to pay December salary to workman.
W 7/ - • • . Notice given by the Court in Case No. 30/65 order the respondent
to pay December salary.
^8/ • • • Order passed in C.P. No. 15/67 by the Labour Court, iMadras
to pay 1963 bonus.
W 9/ • . . . Letter No. L.Dia. No. 3999/67 dt. 21-9-67 from tiie Commissioner
of Labour Madras addressed to Sri K. Srinivasan.
for the Management:
M 1/25-8-62 . . . Office copy of order of Appointment.
M i(a) a portion of Ex. M. 1.
M 2/25-8-62 . . . Communication from Mr. K. Srinivasan agreeing to accept and
abide by the terms and conditions of service.
M 3/1-11-65 . . . Order transferring to Cochin.
M 4/1-11-65 . . . Reply by Mr. K. Srinivasan to the Office order.
At 5/2-11-65 . . . Letter to Workman to the above reply.
M6/2-11-65 • • • Medical certificate from Dr. T. M. Susai.
M 7/2-11-65 . . . Leave application from the Workman.
M 8/9-11-65 . . . Office order granting leave to Workman from 2-11-1965 to n-11-65.
M 9/11-11-65 . , . Leave application from the Workman with medical certificate
dt. 11-11-65.
M 10/16-T1-65 . . Letter to the Workman in reply to Ex. M. 9.
M 11/17-11-65 . . Letter from workman in reply to M. ro.
M 12/20-11-65 . . Letter from workman.
M 13/21-11-65 . . Leave application from Workman.
M 13(3) Medical Certificate dt. 21-11-65,
M 14/22-11-65 . . Letter from Workman.
M 15/25-11-65 . . Letter to Workman in reply to Ex. M. 14.
M r6/ DO. . . Postcard from Workman.
M 17/26-11-65 . . Communication from the Surgeon, Govt, Royapettah Hospital to
the Company.
M 18/26-11-65 . . Letter froni the Workman.
M T9/30-11-65 . . Letter from the Management to Workman.
M 20/1-12-65 . . . Letter from Workman to Management.
M20/(a) Medical Certificate dated 1-12-65.
M 21/2-12-65 . . Charge-sheet filed against the Workman.
M 22/3-12-65 . . . Explanation of workmen to the Charge-memo.
M 23/4-12-65). . . Letter from Workman.
M 24/7-12-65 . . . Letter from Workman.
M 25/8-12-65 . . . Enquiry Notice issued by the Company to the Workman.
M 26/9-12-65 . . . Postal Acknowledgement received from Workman.
M 27/10-12-65 . . Letter to Workman.
M 28/18-12-65 to 24-12-65 Oral evidence recorded by Mr. G. R. Rao, Enquiry Officer at the
domestic enquiry.
M 29/4-1-1966 . . Report of Enquiry Office.
M 30/30-12-65 . . Letter of Mr. Prabhakar, Observer at the Domestic Enquiry with
Endorsement of Mr. Srinivasan and Mr. Gopalaswamy.
M 31/7-1-66 . . . Letter from Management enclosing the findings of the Enauirv
Officer.
M 32/8-1-66 . . . Reply of Mr. Srinivasan to the findings of the Enquiry Officer.
M 33/20-1-66 , . . Order terminating the services of the Workman.
M 34/31-1-67 . , Certified copy of order MSEX. Case No. 17/1966.
M 35/22-4-67 . , Communication from Regional Labour Commissioner regarding
conciliation.
M 36/6-5-67 . . . Report of the Conciliation Officer.
NoTE^-Thc parties arc directed to take return of their document/documents if any, within Six months from this date.
[No. F. 70/10/67/LRIIL]
New Delhi, the 24th November 1967
S.O. 4415.—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, Jaipur, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Associated Cement Companies Limited, Lakheri and their work- men, which was received by the Central Government on the 20th November, 1967.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR.
PRESENT:
Shri J. S- Ranawat, Judge
CASE NO. CIT-1 OF 1966
REFERENCE.—Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment, New Delhi order No. 36/39/65-LRI dated the 13th January, 1966.
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute.
BlTWEEN:
The Lakheri Cement Karamchari Sangh, Lakheri.
AND
The Associated Cement Companies Ltd., Lakheri.
APPEARANCES:
For the Sangh.—Shri Mohamed Ibrahim. For the Company.—Shri J. K. Mathur along with Shri G, L. Govil and Shri V. N. fcak.
Date o1 Award.
5th October, 1967.
AWARD
A no dispute award is passed as prayed for by the representatives of both the parties.
J. S. RANAWAT, Judge,
Central Government Industrial Tribunal. Rajasthan, Jaipur. [No. 36/39/65-LRI.]
New Delhi, the 21th November 1967
S.O. 4416—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, Delhi in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on the 21st November, 1967. '
BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL: • DELHI, -
PRESENT :
Shri Anand Narain Kaul, Industrial Tribunal, Delhi,
REFERENCE C.C.I.D. NO. 8 OF 19<36 BETWEEN
The employers in relation to the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur.
AND
Their workmen, as represented by the Punjab Bank Employees Federation, Shiv Niwas, Adda Kapurthala, JuHundur City. Shri Denish Chander—for the management- Shri Tek Chand—for the workmen.
SEC. 3(11)1 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAVANA 25, 1889 462$AWAHD
By S,O. No. 51(74)/64-LRIV dated 20th August, 1966, the Central Govern- ment was pleased to refer to this Tribunal for adjudication and industrial dispute existing between the employers in relation to the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (to be referred to hereinafter as the Bank) and their workman- The dispute as specified in the Schedule annexed to the reference is in the following terms.
"Whether the management of the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur was justified in discharging Shri Gurdev Singh, Armed Guard, Abohar Branch from service with effect from the 18th April, 1964? If not, to what relief is the employee entitled?"
2. In response to the usual notices issued to the parties, both filed their written statements. They have also filed rejoinders. Some documents have also been filed by the parties. At the hearing on the 16th January, 1967 the parties agreed that the issued for determination snail be the same as in the term of reference. In oral evidence the workman examined himself and an Ayurvedic Practitioner of Bhatinda, WWl Shrl Lai Singh- The Bank examined Shri D. R. Midha. MW1 at present its Agent at Jodhpvr, I have heard the learned representatives of the parties and proceed to record my findings on the issue as indicated in the term of reference.
findings:
3. In the li^ht of the pleadings of the parties there are three points that seem to arise for determination. The first point arises from a preliminary objection taken by the Bank in its written statement. The objection is to the effect that when the present dispute was raised, the Government of India gave a categorical decision on July 20, 1965 that the action of the Bank in discharging Shri Gurdev Singh from service was justified in the circumstances of the case. The reference is to a communication dated 20th July, 19fi5 addressed to the parties by the Under Secret a y to the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employme"t which has been filed as Annexure 'A' to the Bank's written state- ment date-1 the 27th September, 1966. Therein it was stated that, keeping in view the provisions of the Desai Award on the subject of taking disciplinary action the action of the manaRement in discharging Shri Gurdev Singh from service following his conviction by a court of law was not uniustifled. The dispute according to the Under Secretary, was, therefore, not considered fit for reference to a Tribunal for adjudication. On the strength of this document, it is argued that the present reference is not competent since the Government having once decided that the dispute was not fit for reference was not competent to make the present reference. It seems to me that the objection had been waived by the Bank inasmuch as at the hearing on the 16th January, 1967 both the parties had agreed that the only issue that arises for determination la the same aa In the term of reference. Even If this does not amount to a waiver of the objection or even al it be arguable that there could be no waiver of a legal provision which operated aS*£ ^aLt 0. t he p r.e s e nt reference, it would be sufficient to say that it is now well settled that even if at one staKe Government had come to the conclusion that no reference of a dispute was called for, it may re-examine the matter, in the inter- est of Industrial reare, whether In the light of fresh material or otherwise, and
+^ 1 C O m es V t he c o n c l u s i°n that a reference Is justified In the • t if ? /e*e rTe interests of industrial peace. It was so he'd by a Division Bench of the Mysore " 5 w, MQpVTnTTTeTC7i^betTWer V a s u d e va Ra" (B.K.I and State of Mysore and ? = "."• II m' ln- tbe 9 a mc c a se [i w as h e ld t h at it w as not necessary £ H™ £ ,me u -6 rtVaE°?r W h l c-h ,m a d? t he G°vernment to reconsider its prior order since it is e matter enUrely within the State Government's competence The preliminary objection has, therefore no force. P*U"".C.
SMa'IiSXSK S - BESS SSS-4! "Vfi& K?
4*26 Tflflt G J U E T TE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 26, 1889 [PART II—Court he pleaded guilty, threw himself at Its mercy and begged pardon, Accept- ing his confession as voluntary the Magistrate held him guilty under Section 9 of the Opium Act and sentenced him to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 30. In the management's view the oilence of which Shri Gurdev Singh was convicted involved moral turpitude inasmuch as he was convict- ed for being found in illegal possession of a contraband article the possession of which is prohibited and is regulated by a special statute- Under Section 10(i)(b) of the Banking Companies Act, 1949 a Bank is prohibited from employing or continuing the employment of a person who is or has been convicted, by a crimi- nal Court, of an offence involving moral turpitude. In view, however, of the long service of Shri Gurdev Singh the management took a lenient view and discharged the workman with effect from 18th April, 1964 and for the period from 3rd April 1964 to 18th April 1964 during which hg was absent from duty, he was treated as being on privilege leave. The Bank has placed on record a letter Ext. M/l dated the 18th April, 1964 from Shri Gurdev Singh to the Agent of the Bank at Abohar stating that he was arrested by the Police under the Opium Act on the evening of 2nd April, 1964 and remained in the Police lock up till 6th April, that he was challaned on the 7th April and was convicted on the SP ^e day by the Magistrate First Class, Fazilka. As a result of the conviction the Bank on taking a lenient view of the matter merely discharged him for which he thanked the management. He requested that the period of his absence from 3rd April to the date of his application be treated as privilege due to him. According to the Bank, this docu- ment proves that the workman himself had expressed gratefulness for the lenient view of his case taken by the management. The case of the union representing the workman is that Shri Gurdev Singh's father had fallen ill and the medical practi- tioner attending had advised him to bring some opium for his treatment. He accordingly proceeded to bring the opium from Sardul Shahr in Rajasthan. HP WHS arrested by the Police during the return journey and produced before the Magis- trate.
5, From the Judgment of the First Class Magistrate it does not appear that Shri Gurdev Singh took any plea in the court that he bad brousrht the opium for the treatment of his father on the prescription of any Avurvedic Practitioner. Had he taken any such plea, there is no reason why it should not have been mentioned In the Magistrate's order. Before ^ne, however, the workman has stated, in his evidence, that his father, who is living with him at Bhatinda. had an attack of asthma in 1964 for which he was first given alopathic treatment but without any relief- Then he was put under the Ayurvedic treatment of Vaidya, Lai Singh, who practises at Bhatinda. That practitioner is stated to have given a prescription based on an old text book which he had been using. The pres- cription contained certain ingredients such as "ShanKarph", "Sweet Oil", "Opium", "Pepper" etc. required f.br preparation; of (pfills for oral administration, The prescribed quantity of each one of these ingredients, according to the workman, was required to be one Tola. Since according to the workman there is no opium licensee, in the Punjab, he went by bus to Sardul Shahr in Bikaner, Rajasthan, which is! at a distance of about 20 miles from Abohar and where opium Is said to be available with a licensee. On his way back to Abohar he was searched by the Police and the opium was recorded from him. He is stated to have told the Police that he was taking the opium for treatment of his father and had even shown a certificate Ext- W/l of the Vaidya to the Polife. The Police, however, suggested to the workman that he should plead guilty instead of relying en the certificate, He states, however, that even before the Magistrate he had pleaded that he had brought the opium for the treatment of his father. At the Bank also he Is stated to have told the manager that he had brought opium for his father's treatment. On cross-examination the workman cciuld not state the name of the opium licensee who sold him the opium. Fe also stated that hp could not tender the certificate in court since the Police had advised him hat in case he relied on it he might be severely punished. It' will be seen that the workman- has made contradictory statements In his evidence before me. On the one hand he savs that on the advice of thp Police hp pleaded iruilty before the Court Instead of reiving on the certificate Ext- W/l, on the othpr, h? has stated that even before the Court he had pleaded that he had brought the opium for the- treatment of his father. Even otherwise the story is incredible. Shri Lai Sinjfh the Avurvedic Practitioner of Bhatinda who has also been examined has stated that Shri Gurdev Singh's father who was suffering from Bronchial Asthma and also* a creeping pain in his leg was 'under his treatment for 2 to 3 months in 1964, near about the month of January. The treatment of Shri Gurdev Singh's father, however, was not successful initially. Then he gave him a prescription from a printed script which he possesses and which Includes opium. The quantity of opium required, according to the prescription was one Tola and he had1 asked"
SKO. "(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/ AGRA HAY ANA 25, 1S69 4637Shri Gurdev Singh to bririK all the ingredients of the prescription for preparation of the medicine but he never turned up. Then he changed the prescription and tried other medicines as a result of which the patient was ultimately cured during the summer months. He gave Shri Gurdev Singh a certificate which ia Ext. W/l bearing' his signatures- The certificate which is in Gurmukhi when translated into English runs as follows :—
"Vaitl Lai Singh Gill, dated 30th March, 1964,
Wear tiir,
Shri Hari Singh for some time is ill. I required some opium for his treatment u'nlch 1 demand. Disease Asthair.a
{.Si-) VAID LAL SINGH
Re"d. :No, W4 Ehatinda (Punj.ib; Dated E0-3-1H64.
lii era^ examination the witness admitted that his Registration Is umber is 491 and not 394, 11; support of which he produced the original renewal certificate issued tiy the Registrar. In explaining the fact that in Ext. W/l his seal contains the a umber 294, he stated that this was because an error had crept in the seal which ne had got prepared. Further In explaining the fact that the certificate which lie had brought was for 1961, he admitted that registration is required annually and thaf ha had got lenewal certificates for subsequent years also but those had not been put in a frame and he had only brought one which had been put in a name. Hu admitted that he had never before issued a certificate for purchase of opium and further that in a certificate of that kind, the practitioners are expected to give full particulars of the prescription unlike what had been done In Ext. W/i. He could not say how much dose of opium would prove lechai uid stared that it would depend upon the capacity of a person to absorb opium. The witness does maintain a register showing the names of the patients to be treated, the disease from which they are suffering and the treatment prescribed but he had not brought the Register. It will be seen from the very nature of the evidence of this witness that it is most unreliable and the certificate Ext- W/l seems to be a clumsy attempt to save the workman. On behalf of the management Shri D. R. Midha, who was Agent of the Bank at Abohar branch during the relevant period has been examined. He has stated that it was in view of Shri Gurdev Singh's conviction under the Opium Act and in view of the fact that the Bank is a credit institution, that they had discharged him. Although under the service conditions of Shri Gurdev Singh he should have been dismissed, the Bank authorities took a lenient view and only discharged him. Ext. MW1/1 Is a true copy of the order of discharge. According to the witness, Shri Gurdev Singh had never told him, on receiving his order of discharge, that his father was ill mr did be tell him after his conviction and payment of the fine, that the opium was being taken to save the life of his father. The witness has further stated, categorically, that Shri Gurdev Singh was an opium addict since, on several occasions, when he came to htm he had found him drowsy and on enquiry he told the witness that he had on that day taken nn extra st-on>e admit- ted that he had never comnlalned to the Head Offlc° that Shri Gurdev SlnE(h was an OTJium addict. From the mere fact that the locil ba^k authorities had never put It on record that Shri Ourdpv Singh was HI opium addict It not sufficient to show that the evidence of the Agent Is unreliable. If Shri Ourdev Singh's addic- tion to ODium had not Interfered with the d^cha^ce of his dutl°a. It Is nultp con- ceivable that the local authorities did not consider It npressarv to make any adverse entry against him or to complain to the higher authorities against him.
fi. There Is no doubt that Shri Gurdev Singh was bringing the opium surreDti- tiouslv and it had been broucht, In all probability, for his own use- Such a quantity could not have been brought for sale anr) It U also most unlikely that as much as one tola of opium should have been required for an Ayurvedir prescrip- tion. "In anv case It WHS to* the workman to nrove that he hud brought the opium for a botia Ude purpose and the story which he has now built up seems +0 be an after thought since he dofs not sPem to have mentioned this even to the Bank authorities and, as shown bv me already he WHS even grateful to the Bank for the lenient view that they had taken of his condutt,
7. As stated by the union Itself, in Its statement of claim, it is the motive be- hind the commission of an offence which b decisive of the fact whether it involved
4628 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25. 18S9 JPART JJ-rnoral turpitude. Even in the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Mudfta Pitai vs. Sub Divisional Omcer Malihabad reported in AIK 1965 AHanabad 3B2 on which the union has relied, it has been observed as follows:—
"Whether an ofTence involves moral turpitude will depend upon its nature and the circumstances in which it is committed. An offence of a cer tain class may generally be considered to involve moral turpitude but may not be so if committed in particular circumstances. It is not the gravity of the offence or the quantum of punishment which will deter mine the question-"
"
8- In the circumstances of the present cas?, there is no doubt that the cor, duct of the workman involved moral turpitude. It is inconceivable that one tola of opium could have been supplied by a licensee to the workman without a proper voucr.-jr or ps-nu- li
9 The tnird point lor decision is, whether even 0:1 the basis that the offence committed by the workman involved moral turpitude, the termination of service of the workman was effected in an appropriate manner. The procedure laid down in the Sasiry Award in connection with the taking of disciplinary action is con- tained in Paragraphs 520 and 521 of that award. In the Dasai Award the learned Tribunal, after reproducing the provisions of paragraphs 520 and 521 of the Sastry Award, observed that no case had been made out for making any substantial changes in the procedure laid down by the Sastry Award. According, with the ex- ception of a minor additional dire.t.on contained in Para- 18, 24 the Desai Award left the provisions for disciplinary action contained in the Sastry Award un- touched. Para. 521 of the Sastry Award provides that a person against whom disciplinary action is proposed or likely to be taken should, in the first instance, be informed of the particulars of the charge against him; and should have a proper opportunity to give his explanation as to such particulars and that final orders should be passed after due consideration of all the relevant facts and circum- stances. The expression "offence" has been denned in sub-para (1) as any offence Involving moral turpitude for which an employee is liable to conviction and sen- tence under any provision of Law- Sub-para (2) (a) of Paragraph 521 provides that when, in the opinion of the management an employee has committed an offence, unless he be otherwise prosecuted, the bank may take steps to prosecute him or get him prosecuted. Clause (b) of the same sub-para provides that "if IK be convicted he may be dismissed with effect from the date of his conviction or be given any lesser form of tnmisnment a<; m^ntio^ed in suH-nara. (5) below" Clause (c) of sub-para. (2) provides that, in the event of the management deciding, after enquiry, not to continue him in service, he shall be liable only for termination of service with three months' pav and allowances in lieu of notice. Snb PaTi. (3) provides that if the authority which was to start prosecution proceedings refuses to do so or comes to the conclusion that there is no case for prosecution it shall be open to the management to proceed against the employee under the orovisions set out in sub-rsarairaphs (9) and (10) infra relating to dis^hgrire. but he shall be deemed to have been on duty during the period of suspension, if any, and, shall be entitled to the full wages and allowances and to all other orivilpges for such period. In the event of the management deciding, after enquiry, not to continue him in service, he shall be liable only for termination with three months' pay and allowances in "H°n of nnti"p as r^ireot^d in sub-naraersnh (%) and cer- tain o+her D"niit"'"'n>Ds °vi":+ t he m i s c o n d u ct m av h" f>"nn'oT'P'1 atri in cas" ?nk it erjedient to retain the employee in question any longer in service- Discharge in swh cases shall not be dpemed to amount to cHscfniinarv acfinn. Par*>OT!"t>h 52? of the Sastry Awa>-r) which TaH down the oroceduro for termination of em- ployment has also been left untouched. Su^-twa. (h of this Para"rpmh lavs down that in cases not involving disciplinary action for misconduct the employment of a
SEC 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16. 1967/AGR-\HAYANA 25, 1889 4629permanent employee may be terminated by three months' notice or on payment of three month's "pay and allowances in lieu of notice.
10. Evidently the case of Shri Gurdev Singh is covered by Para 522 sub-para (11 of the Sastry Award read with sub-paras. (l)(2)(c). (2)(d), (3). (5)(e) and (10) (c) of para 521. The management having taken a lenient view ol the conduct of the workman, it could only have discharged him with three months' pay and allowances in lieu of notice" under Paragraph 522 of the Sastry Award. Since no charge-sheet was framed and no notice was given, it is not a case of dis- ciplinary action and the least that was required was payment of three months' pay and allowances in lieu of notice-
11. In the result I hold that the Bank was justified in discharging Shri Gurdev Singh but not without payment of 3 months pay and allowances in lieu of notice. I make an award accordingly and direct tbat the said amount be paid to him- (Thirteen pages).
The 31st October, ]D67
< Sd ) ANAND NARATN KATJL,
Industrial Tribunal: Delhi. [No. P. 51/74/60-LRIV-l Ken- Delhi, the 2nd Deceitibvr lytiV
S-G. 4417.—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, Bombay, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to Messrs Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works, Bombay and their Work- men which was received by the Central Government on the 24th November, 1967.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BOMBAY
REFERENCE NO. CG1T-58 OF li)65
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to Messrs Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works. Bombay.
AND
their workmen
PRESENT :
Shri A. T. Kambre, Presiding Officer.
APPEARANCES :
For the employers: Shri K. R. Tripathi. For the workmen: Shri R. A. Pandit. Assistant Secretary, Transport and Dock Workers' Union, Bombay.
STATE: Maharashtra.
INDUSTRY: Major Ports.
Dated at Bomhav this the 21st cloy of November 1967
AWARD PART III
The Central Government. Ministry of Labour and Employment by Order No- 28/78/65-LRIV dated 6th September 1965 referred to this Tribunal the indus- trial dispute between the employers in relation to Messrs. Shri Mankeshwar Mech- anical Works. Bombay and their workmen represented by the Transport and Dock Workers' Union, Bombay in respect of the matters specified in the schedule to the said order: —
SCHEDULE
I. Whether the following demands of the workmen are justified?
(i) Increase in wages. (ii) Issue of attendance cards and photo identify cards.
Uii) Grant of Interim Relief, (iv) Grant of stream allowance. (v) Increase in the strength of employees, (vi) Introduction of Gratuity Scheme-
4 6 30 T H F- G A Z E T TE OF I N D IA : D E C. 16, 1 9 6 7 / A G R A I I A Y A NA 2 5, 1889 [ P A RT I I-If s o, to w h at r e l i ef a re t he w o r k e rs e n t i t l e d?
I I. W h e t h er t he t e r m i n a t i on of t he s e r v i ce of t he f o l l o w i ng w o r k m en w as j u s t i-
f i e d? If n o t, to w h at r e l i ef a re t h e se w o r k e rs e n t i t l e d?
C a t e g o ry
N a me of t he w o r k er
S. No
. .
. . ..
. ..
M a z d o or M u k a d a n i. G a s - c u t t e r. M a z d o o r. M a z d o o r. M a z d o o r. M a z d o o r. AssU. G as C u t t e r. Boiler m a k c r - M i s t r v, M a z d o o r.
i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
ii
. ..
W e l d e r. M u z d o o r. A l a z d o o r. G a s - C u t t e r, M a z d o o r. M a z d o o r. B o i l e r - m a k e r.
. ..
12 13 H 15 r6 17 18
. .
19 20
. .
21
. ..
. .. . ..
Z2 23 a4 25
26 27
S h rl A ba T u k a r am . . .. S h ri A d ya P r a s ad P a r a s n a th S h ri B a n a r si S h iv Balak . S h ri Bonsai M u n oo S h ri B h u r a k u n di K a l i d in . S h ri H a s a nn Ali A b d ul Rehrrum . . .. S h ri J a g p at P r cm S h a n k er . . . .. S h ri J a i n a r a y an Bliagwati S h ci J a i r am P a ti S h ri jfetha S h a n k er Balikram S h ri Jinjatn S h y am S un i er . S h ri J u m m an R e h m a t u l l ah . . S h ri L a l t a p r a s ad S h u b h n a th . - S h ri L a l t a p r a s ad S h a n k e r. S h ri P r u 3 i d h n a r a y an S h r i n a r a y an . . .. S h ri P h e r ai B h a g oo . . S h ri R a m p a th B a d ri . . . . .. S h ri Ramprasad" S h iv M u r at S h ri R am N i h or M a t a b ig . S h ri R a m r aj J o k h ai . .. S h ri R am M o o t at S a d l oo S h rl R am Baraii M u n oo . . S h ri R a m g on S h o b h n a th S h ri R a m k e w al R am N i r a n j an . S h ri R a m l a k h an K a i h i r am . S h ri S h o 9 h n a r a y an S h iv M u r at S h ri S r i p at Abhaira) . . . . ..
W e l d e r. W e l d e r. Mazdoor. Mazdoor. Mazdoor. Mazdoor. Assistant Gas-Cultcr. Mazdoor, Gas-Cutter. Welder. I lammerman.
2. My learned predecessor Shri Salim M. Merchant has by his Award P a rt I dated 4th November 19G8 disposed of the dispute between the employers and the following 9 workmen covered by demand No. II under reference.
Serial No.
Name
1 8 10
13 17 18
19 26
Shri Aba Tukaram. Shri Jainarayan Bhagwati. Shri Jetha Shanker Balikram. Shri Laltaprasad Shobhnath. Shri Rampath Badri. Shri Rnmprawd Shiv Murat, Shri Ram Nihor Matabig. Shri Shoshnarayan Shiv Murat. Shri Sripat Abhaira),
27
3- Subsequently by his Awurd Part II dated 9th May 1967 the dispute in respect of the six demands covered by Issue No- 1 was resolved and there remained only the dispute in resptjci. of the remaining 18 workmen covered by demand No. 1.
4. After prolonged discussions the parties filed before me a joint memorandum of settlement on 14th November 19ti7 which is marked annexure "A". The union has not pressed the claim of the following two workmen viz-, Shrl Bhurkundi Kalidin (Serial No. 5 in the list1) and Shri Prasidhrmrayan Shrinaxayan (Serial No, 15 in the list) and there remains no dispute regarding them. According to the terms of settlement the employers have agreed to pay to the remaining 16 workmen retrenchment compensation. They are also given option either to accept the com- pensation and forego their past service prior to 19G5 or to continue in employment without compensation and get the benefit of the entire length of service. The above terms of settlement are clearly beneficial to the workmen and in the facts
SEC. 3(li)] THE GAZETTK OF INDIA; nr,C. 1G, 19fi7/AGR'\HAYANA 25, 1889 4631and circumstances of the case are fair nnd reasonable. I, therefore, make an award in terms of the joint memorandum of scifiement dated 14th Novenber 1%T marked atmexure '•/.'' which shall furm par1 of this Award.
No ordei as to costs.
Sd/- A. T. ZAMBRE,
Presiding Officer,
AU N EX I IKE ' A'
BEFORE T1IF, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL. AT BOMBAY
RI-F'UIIENCE No. 58 OF ]0G5
PARTIES :
EmpJyers in relation to Shrl Mankeshwar Mechanical Works,
AND
Their Workmen
May It Please the Hon'ble Tribunal,
We, the parties abovenamed have reached the following settlement on issue
No. 2 under Reference 5& of 1965:
Issue No. 2: , (1) On this issue, the Union does not press the claim of Shrl Bhurkundi Kalidin (No- 5 in the list) and Shri Prasid Narayan ShrJnarayan (No. 15 in the list). With regard to the remaining 16 workmen concerning this issue parties are agreed that the employers company shall pay to each of them the amount shown against his name in full and final settlement of all their claim by way of retrenchment compensation.
A m o u nt
S r. N o.
N a me of w o r k e r^
. .
. . . ..
2 3 4 6 7 9 II 12
.
14 16 20 21 22
23 24
A d y a p r a s ad P a r e s n a th . . . . . . .. B a i i a r a si S h i v b a l ak B a i i si M a n oo H a s s a m li A b d ul R c h m an . . . . . .. J c g p at P r c m sh a n k er . . . . . . .. j a i r am P a t hi D i n k er S h y am S u n d er . . . . . • J u m an R a h i m t u l la . . L a l t a p r a s ad S h a n k er . . . . .. P h e r a l B h a su R a m r aj J o o l d i ai R a m m u r at S a d l oo R a r a b a r an M a n oo . . . . . . . .. R a m g a in S h o b n a th . . . . . . .. R a m k c w al R a m n i r a n j on . . . . . . .. R a m l a k h an K a s h i r am . . . . . . ..
R s, 7 8 - 60 P s. Rs. 4T'T! P
25
Rs. 1771-90 Ps.
(2) Parties are afireed that the payment in full of the above mentioned will be made on or before 31st January, 1968- It is agreed that the employer co-npany will issue the above workmen the necessary Certificates as and when they will make the applications.
(3) It is further agreed that the above 16 workmen, tho^e who will not work with the company If they have Identity Cards, they will return the same to the Company on or before 31st January, 1968,
(4) It is agreed that the lfi concerned workmen will be plven ootion either to accept the compensation or to continue in the employment without compensation. In the case of any workman who accepts the compensation he will forero his past services prior to 1965 and if he expresses his dc^)re to con+1nue In the employment of the company his fresh services will be counted from 1965,
4632 THE GAZETTE Oi' INDIA: DEC. Id, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART 11-(5) In the case of such workers who desire to continue without compensation will eel the b-?nefH nt eiitrirt: length of service as shown below:
Sr. Nt '. Name of the workers
Y e ar of s e r v i ce as m u t u a l ly a g r e ed b e t. w e en t he P a r t i es u p to 3 0 - 6 - 1 9 65
z
2
T A J y a p r a s ad P a r i : s n a l ]i . . . . . . .. B a n a r si S h i v h a l nk . . . . . . . ..
3
B n t i si M a n i Ki . . . . . . . . ..
4
'1 J l a s s a m i li A b d ul R d i m nn .
. .
3
J e g p ct P r e m s h a n k er . . . . . . ..
I 7
J a r i r am P a t hi . ..
9
4 ii D i n k er S h y am S u u d or
. . . . ..
2
12 J u m an R a l i i m t u l la
. . . . . . ..
4 I ^ a l t a p r a s aJ S h a n k ci
. . . . . ..
1 r4 16 P h c r ai D h a gu . . . . . . ..
5 20 R a m r aj J o n k h ai . . . . . ..
3 21 K s m m u r at S u d l on
. . . . . . ..
2
2,2 R a m b a r an M a n oo . . . . . . . ..
Nrl
R a m g a in S h u b n a th . . . . . . . ..
2 23
R a m k u w al K a m n i i u n j a ii
. . . . . ..
3 24 25 R o r t i l a k h an K a s M r am
. . . . . ..
( 6) It is a g r e ed by a nd b e t w e en t he p a r t i es t h at t he e m p l o y er c o m p a ny v v i ll i n f o rm a ll t he 10 w o r k m en c o n c e r n ed t he t e r ms of t h is s e t t l e m e nt by U O th N o v e m- b e r, 1 9 G7 a nd t he w o r k e rs w i ll i n f o rm t h e ir i n t e n t i on as s t a t ed in p a in 4 of t h is s e t t l e m e nt l a t e st by 1 5 th F e b r u a r y, 1 9 6 8.
{") T h e se 1G w o r k m en a re t e m p o r a ry w o r k e rs at p r e s e n t.
Dated at Bombay this 14th day of November, 1967-
For the Employer in relation to For the Transport, and Dock
Shrl Mankeshwar Mechanical Works. Workers' Union, Bombay.
1, (Sd.) K. R. TRIPATHI.
1- (Sd-j R- A. PANDIT,
Asst. Secretary.
Before me
Sd/- A. T. ZAMBRE,
Presiding Officer
Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal, Bombay.
14-11-1967-
[No. 28/7H/6S-LRIV-]
New Dullii, the tth December 1967
S-O. 4418-—In Tiursnorice of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of Shri A S- Gupta, Arbitrator in the dispute between the management of Messrs Daulatram Rameshwarhxll. Contractor, Nandini Lime Stone Mines of Bhilai Steel Project, Post Office Nandini, District Durg and their workmen represented by the Steel Workers Union, Nandini Mines which was received by the Central Govern- ment on the 27th November, 1907-
Ste 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 23, 1889 4633BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) BILASPUR AND ARBITRATOR.
PHKSENX :
Shii A- S- Gupta, Assistant Labour Commissioner ("Central). Bilaspur.
in the matter of arbitration of an Industrial dispute 'ancier Section 10-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
P/i- - : E S:
' {/:-. Daula! Ea.n Rimer hwar Lall. Contractors. Nandini Lime Stone Mines of B.S.P . P.O. Nandini Mines (Distt. Durj"). M-P.
AND
Their workmen represented by The Steel Workers' Union, Nandini Minos Branch, P.O. Nandini Mines (Distt. Durg). M.P.
A)"- -'ARANCES:
For the Employer.!.—1. Shri O- P- Bhuwalkar, Agent. M/t Daulat Ram Rp'ncshwar I all
2. Si-.ri S. Ghosh. Assistant Manager, M/s. Daulat R an Eameshwar Lall.
For the v^orkmp,-..—Shn T? 'J- Gupta. Secretary, Steal Workers' Union, P.O. Nandini Mines (Distt. Durg).
Sv."": Madhya Pradesh
INDUSTRY: Lime Stone
3i;a.?pur. Date:-; the 2t;'; November, 1967
AWARD
Sy an arbitration agreement which was published in the Gazette of India by i.w Central Government by their Order No- 37/16/66-LRI dated 14th July 1966 the parties above-named agreed before the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central). Kaipur that the controversy that had arisen between them over the plleged wrongful removal from service of Shri Jalim Singh be settled by reference to arbi- tration under Section 10-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 and for tne purpose they referred the said controversy to my arbitration with the following terms of r"ifet^;.ca:
"Whether the mana?pment of M/s Daulat Ram Rameshwarlall, Contractors. Nandini Lime Stone Mines, was justified in removing Shri Jalim Singh, from service with effect from 22nd May, 196(5?, If not- to what relief is the workman entitled?"
:. Mntices were issued to the parties for the submission of their -.vr:*tp" state- ments but they took a long time in complying with this obligation. Whereas the union submitted its written statement on 23rd February 1967, it was received from the employers only on 16th May 1967. Before that I had heard this case at Bilaspur on 13th March 1967 on the basis of the written statement filed by the Union. Before I could actually start proceedings, the parties showed inclination to discuss the case between themselves for arriving at a mutual settlement. The request of the parties was acceded +n and thev were allowed time up to 29th March 1967 for the purpose. The employers' representative was. however, told that in case the mutual settlement was not possible they should file their written statement on 29th March 1967 to facilitate further proceedings in the instant dis- nuto. As I remained otherwise busy T could not take up th;s case on 29th March 19(57 and a next date was fixed for 20th April 1967 which c'atp was subsequently shifted to 16th May 1967 at thp request of the employers- At the hearing that toote olace on 16th May 1967 the employers' representative filed their written statement. As the Union wanted to go through the emol overs' written statement wiib a VIPW to tvrftparinp its case for nreuing beforp me its representative sought adjettrnment which was allowed Thorf>?fter 1lii" ens? wa" fixed on a number of occ^inn"? hut the partips could not attend earlier than !?f)th July 1967- The ennlovers' rpnresentn+ive aeavn made n r p i wt to aHow them some time for mutual negotiation. Their request was acceded to and thev were allowed time fc- " !\->n"^ *i +'i^ rv-^rti"- 4634 T HE &AZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16. 1967/ACRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART II
3. Thereafter, I fixed heaiing in this case for 31st August 1967, 28th September 1967, 24th October 1967 and 5th November 1907 but no hearing could take place an all these dates owing to absence of one of the parties. Finally the parties appear- ed before me on 11th November 1967 and they filed a compromised settlement (Annexure I) resolving the issue on the following terms and conditions;
(1) That Shri Jalim Singh shall be paid Rs. 800.00 (Rupees Eight hundred only) in full and final settlement of all his claims against the manage- ment of M/s. Daulat Ram Rameshwarlall, Contractors, Nandini Lime Stone Mines of B.SP.
(2) That the amount as agreed to in Clause (1) above shall be paid to Shri Jalim Sineh within 2 days.
4- In their petition the parties also prayed that I should make my Award In terms of the above settlement-
5. 1 find the settlement quite fair and reasonable and I make my Award accord- ingly.
b. Tbc-re is no order as to costs.
(3d-) A. S- GUPTA,
Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) and
Arbitrator, Bilaspur.
ANNEXURE I
BEFORE THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) BILASPUR (ARBITRATOR) In the matter of an Industrial Dispute
BETWEEN The management of "M/s "Daulat Ram Rame:l:ivar I,all Contractors, Nandini Lime Si >:iy Mines of Bhilai Steel Plant, P.O. Nandini Mines (District Durg) (MP)
A7-TD Th~'ir wTinmen represented by Shri H C- Gupta, Secretary, Steel Workers' Union Nandini Mines Branch, P.O. Nandini Mines (district durg) (M.P.)
Compromised Settlement
The subject matter of the dispute was mutually discussed between the parties and they have arrived at the following Settlement:
(1) That Shri Jalim Singh shall be paid Rs. 800.00 (Rupees Eight hundred only) in full and final settlement of all his claims against the manage- ment of M/s- Daulat Ram Rameshwar Lall, Contractors. Nandlni Lime Stone Mines of BS P-
(2) That the amount as agreed to in Clause (I) above shall be paid to Shri Jalim Singh within 2 days
The parties, therefore, pray that Arbitrator may kindly be pleased to make his Award In terms of the above settlement
(Sd.) O- P BHUWALKAR,
(Sd.) H. C. GUPTA,
Agent
Secretary,
M/s. Daulat Ram Rameshwar Lall, Steel Workers' Union. Contractors. Nandini Limestone Mines, P.O, Nandini Mines,
P.O. Nandini Mines (Dlstt. Durg). (Distt Durg). (Representing Management), (Representing Workmen).
Bilaspur, Accepted Dated the llth November, 1967.
(Sd.) Illegible
Assistant Labour Commissioner!C). Bilaspur (M.P.)
[No. 3 7 / 1 6 / e m a i'
S.O. 4419-—In pursuance of section 17 oi the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to Kirlburu Iron Ore Mines of the National Mineral Develop- ment Corporation Limited and their workmen, which was received by tht Central Government on the 30th November, 1967.
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGE.AHAYANA 25, 1389 4635BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO- 2)
AT DHANBAD
In the matter of a reference under Section 10(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947
REFERENCE NO, 245 OF 1967
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to Kiriburu Iron Ore Mines of the National Mineral Develop nan; J j r pc ation Limited-
AND
Their Workmen.
PRESENT :
Sri Nandagiri Venketa Rao, Presiding Officer.
APPEARANCES :
For the Employers: Sri U. Prasad, I.A.S. Senior Administrative Officer. For the Workmen: Sri R. K. Nair, General Secretary, N.M.D.C. Mines Workers' Union, Kiriburu.
STATE: Bihar
INDUSTKY: Iron Ore.
Dhanbad, dated the 22nd November, 1967 AWARD
As the employers in relation to Kiriburu Iron Ore Mines of the National Mineral Development Corporation limited and their workmen represented by the National Mineral Development Corporation Mines Workers' Union Kiriburu, jointly applied to the Central Government under sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 for reference to a Tribunal of an Industrial Disputes which exists between them in respect of the matter set up in the said application and reproduced in the schedule hereto annexed, the Central Government, being satisfied that the said National Mineral Development Corporation Mines Workers' Union, Kiriburu represented the majority of the said workmen, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, xeferred the said dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal by its order F- No. 37/8/67/LRI dated the 24th July, 1967. The schedule is extracted below-.
"SCHEDULE
Whether on the enforcement of the Standing Orders, the workmen of Kiri- buru Iron Ore Project are still entitled to leave as provided in the National Mineral Development Corporation Leave Rules? If not. to what relief are the workmen entitled?"
2. The workmen were represented by Sri R. K. Nair, General Secretary, N.D.M.C. Mines Workers' Union, Kiriburu and the employers by Sri U- Prasad, I.A.S- Senior Administrative Officer. Both the parties filed their statements of demands- On behalf of the workmen, Ext. Wl to W8 and on behalf of the employers Ext. Ml to M3 are marked. Ext. Ml is the same as Ext. Wl and Ext. M2 is the same as Ext- W2. Both the parties made a statement that there is no witness to examine-
3. The National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) was incorporated as a Company in 1958 and from about May, 1959 it has been engaged in the work of exploitation of the iron ore at the Kiriburu Iron Ore Mine. The terms and conditions of service of the employees were govern- ed by such rules, regulations, orders and directions as •were from time to time issued by the Corporation. In or about 1962 the Corporation framed leave rules known as '"National Mineral Development Corporation Leave Rules, 1962" (herein- after referred to as N.M.D.C Leave Rules) applicable to its employees- The N.M.D.C. Leave Rules came into effect in or about May, 1962. But prior to the N-MD-C. Rules were framed and brought into force the Corporation submitted draft standing orders under Section (3) of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, before the Certifying Officer, Dhanbad in or about I960. Again oometime in 1964 the Corporation submitted to the same Certifying Officer revised draft Standing Orders- The Certifying Officer, after complying with Section 5 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, by his order dated 24th December, 1964, certified the draft Standing Orders, after making the necessary modifications therein. Thereafter the Corpomtion as well as the workmen went in appeal to the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), the appellate authority, against the order of the Certifying Officer- But the Corporation as well as the workmen withdraw their appeals, and, consequently, the appellate authority confirmed under Section 6(1) of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, the Stand- ing Orders in the form certified by the Certifying Officer, by the order dated 19th December 1966- Thus, the Certified Standing Orders came into effect from 26th
4636 ) HE GAZE I" IE OF INDIA: DEC. 1(3. 19C7/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART U-December 1966 under section 7 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act. 1946- These facts are not controverted.
4. The ease of the workmen is that they were enjoying higher scale of leave, holidays etc- under the N iVl.D.C Leave Rules before the Certified Standing Orders came into force with effect from 26th December 1966 and that, as such, the Corpora- tion was not legally right in curtailing their leave, nolidays etc, by enforcing the Certified Standing Orders. The stand taken by the employers is that the Certified Standing Orders became the conditions of employment, of the workmen under the Corporation with effect from 26-12-1966, on which date the Certified Standing Orders came into force and that the Certifted Standing Orders bound the Cor- poration as well as its workmen under the law. In support the Corporation has relied upon tha decision of t,na Supreme Court in 1960(l)SCR 348. In short, the workmen want to ignore the Certified Standing Orders and seek benefit under the N.M.D.C. Leave Rules. It is not relevant at this stage to consider whether ttie X M. D- C- Leave Rules are more liberal to the workmen than the Certified Standing Orders. When the Certified Standing Orders came into force they superseded the NM.D.C- Leave Rules to the extent they were contrary to the provisions contained in the Certifying Standing Orders. The workmen, having withdrawn their appeals, me not entitled to question the Certifying Standing Orders, under Section 10 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Oidersi Act, 1B46. The Standing Orders finally certified under the act shall not, except on agreement between the employer and the workmen, be liable to modification under the expiry of six months from the date of which the Standing Orders or the last modifications thereof came into operation. For the employers as well as workmen if it is necessary to get the Certified Standing Orders modified, provision is made under Sub-section (2) of Section 10. Unless modification is sought as provided lor by the law no party to the Certified Standing Orders can dispute them or resort to avoid them. No oral evidence having the effect of adding to or otherwise varying or contradicting the Standing Orders is admissible in any court. In this view I do not find any substance in the contention of the workmen.
5. I, therefore, hold that on the enforcement of the Standing Orders for Kiriburu Iron Ore Project Minp under the control of National Mineral Development Corporation Limited as certifiVr! by the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central > (Appellate Authority) by its order dated 19-12-1966. The workmen of K'riburu Iron Ore Project are no more entitled to leave as provided in the National Mineral Development Corporation Leave Rules and. consequently, they ore pot entitW to any relief. The award is made accordingly and submitted under Section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
(Sd) N- VENKATA E ".
Presiding Officer.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No. 2)
AT DHANBAD
A.T. REF. NO. 245 OF 1967
The RmrtUws in relation to Kiriburu Iron Or? Mines of the Nationa1
Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.—Employers.
Vs.
Their Workmen— Opposite Parties-
List of documents admitted in evidence for employers.
Description of document and dated
Di
Date of admission
Whether admitted by consent ©r on proof.
2
3
4
Ext. Mi Exr, M2
D o.
Copy of the standini? order? Cooy of the N.M-D.C. Leave Rules,
Ext. M3 • ..
SK; 3(iI)J THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. lfi, l967/AGRAHi"YA>U 25, 1889 4637BEFORE THH CENTRAL GOVERNA" NT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (N<\ 2)
AT DiiANBAD
A.T. REFERENCE N O. 245 op 1967
The limployerg in relation to Kirtburu Iron Ore Mines of the National
Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.--Employers.
Their workmen -Opposite Parties.
List of documents admitted in evidence for workmen.
D.scripiion ofilncument & date
Du-.i-inuishins m;irk of
number
Date of admission
Whether admitted by consent or on proof.
t
2
3
4
B K- Wr
•
•
•
C^py of tho Standing Orders
30-9-67 By consent
Copy of tho N.M.D.C, Leave Ruks.
D o.
Do.
Copy of memorandum of setrlemviii
dated 12-12-66 . . ..
Do.
Do.
! •- W4
Do.
Copy of letter dured 30-1-67 addressed lo the General Manage:-, K.I.O.M. Kg. leave dispute -
D".
R'. W5 • • - Copy of the letter dated 17-4-67 of the Geneval Secrcrnry addressed lo the Asstt. Labour Commissioner, Dhan- bad-II and copy of the General M a n a g er . . ..
Do.
Do.
Copy of Conciliation report dated
]•:•.. w.i
D o.
D o.
22-4-67 reg. leave disp.
Ec. W7
Do.
D o.
Copy of the brier dated 24-7-67 of the General Secretary addressed to the Asstt. Libour Comraissioner (C), Dhanbadi and copy endorsed to the General Manager.
E-:-. Wd
D o.
Do.
Copy of nu'iagernents1 leave circular dart-d 30-12-61,31-12-62, 31-12-63, 19-8-65, 7-9-65 and 5-1-67
3d,'-. Illegible
Presiding Officer, Central Government Add tiotnl Industrial Tribunal,
Dhanbad.
LNo. 37/8/87-LRI.J
New Delhi, the Gth December 1967
S.O. 442O.^In pursuance oJC section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 o£ 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the National Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta in the industrial dispute between the employers In relation to the management .;f Messrs. The Statesman Limited,
4638 THE'GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. lti, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1HKO [PAR: I I-Calcutta and New Delhi and their workmen which was received by the Central Government on the 128th November, 19C7: —
NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT CALCUTTA
REFEKFNCE NO. NIT-1 OP 1967
PARTIES :
Employers In relation to the Management of Messrs The Statesman Ltd-i Calcutta and New Delhi,
AND
Their workmen
PRESENT :
Shri S. K- Sen—Presiding Officer.
APPEARANCES .
On behalf of Employers.—Shri P. P. Ginwalla, Bur-at-Law, with Shri A. Choudhury, Bar-at-Law-
On behalf of Workmen.—Shri D. L. Sen Gupta, Advocate for Union Nos 1 & 2- Shri A. P- Chatterjee, Advocate for Union No. 3.
INDUSTRY: Newspaper
AWARD
By Order No. 8/44/6G-LR-IV dated 25th February, 1067 the Central Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between the management of Messrs The Statesman Limited, Calcutta and New Delhi and their workmen In respect of the matters specified in the following schedule:
"1. Bonus for the year 1964 payable in 1965. 2- Bonus for the year 1905 payable In 188(i- 3. Dearness allowance- 4. Medical beneflts- 5. Leave."
issues Nos. 1 and 2— Bonus for the years 1964 and 1965
2- The financial year of the Statesman corresponds to the calendar year i.e- year ending on 31st December each year. For the year ending 31st December, 1964 the company declared bonus at 14:6 per cent vide the bonus notice Ext. F, the allocable surplus for the year being worked out at Rs. 8,92,677 vide the com- putation sheet, Ext. L. Bonus for the year ending 31st December, 1965 was declared at 10-81 percent vide the bonus notice, Ext- Fl, the allocable surplus for the year being worked out at Rs. 6,99,723 wide the computation sheet, Ext. LI. The notice Ext. F, relating to bonus for the year ending 31st December 1964 mentioned that as bonus was being distributed under the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Ordinance 1965, approximately 1200 employees, i.e., lower paid employees would receive a larger bonus than they did in the previous year when the com pany had its own working rule for calculating bonus and that the remaining employees would receive less than they received in Ihe previous year; but as a special case the company would make an additional ex-tfratia payment on an ad hoc basis to such employees to the extent of the shortfall. It was a7so men- tioned that in the event of any additional sum being found payable to employees as bonus, only such part of the sum would be paid as might exceed the ex-gratia payments made. In other words, In case any additional sum was found payable as bonus, adjustments would be made against the ex-gratia payments. The notice Ext. Fl relating to bonus for the year ending Slst December, 1965 con- tained a similar provision as to an ad hoc ex-gratia payment, and a similar clause that any additional sum found payable as bonus would be adjusted against ex- gratia payment-
s' The employees are represented by 3 unions, namely the Statesman Em- ployees' Union, Calcutta which is the union mainly of the non-clerical staff employed at the Statesman office at Calcutta; the Statesman Clerical Staff Union. Calcutta and the Statesman Employees' Union, New Delhi which is the union of both clerical and non-clerical staff employed at the Statesman office at New Delhi- The unions were not satisfied with the amount of bonus declared by
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1%7/AGRAHAVANA £5, 1889 4639the company for the year 1964 and 1965 and they pressed their objections in letters addressed to. the Manager or the Chief Administrative Officer of the Statesman. The Manager or the Chief Administrative Officer sent replies to these letters refuting the claim to any higher bonus. The matter could not be settled by correspondence and negotiations between the parties or even at the intervention of the Conciliation Officer, and accordingly the question as to the proper quantum of bonus is before the tribunal.
4. The two unions at Calcutta filed one joint written stftement and a separate written statement was filed by the union of. New Delhi. The unions of Calcutta mentioned that prior to the 1963 bonus was beins paid for several years ft the rate of 3J months' basic pay, that when the Payment of Bonus Ordinance and thereafter the Payment of Bonus Act came into force, the company istued notices stating that only 14.6 percent bonus was payable for the year 1£64 end 1081 percent for the year 1965, but the unions were not satisfied and they claimed U0 percent of the annual earnings as bonus for each of the two years. The unic-na challenged the computation of the allocable surplus by the company and claimed that various additional items should be added back in computing the profits- Claim as to some of the additional items was made during the hearing after the annual accounts and balance-sheets for the iwo years had been proved and breakups of various figures furnished by the company. The claims will be considered in due course. The New Delhi union also made n:oie or liss the sairw claim relating to bonus for the two years.
5- The two computations of allocable surplus as made by the con-pany, on the basis of which they declared the percentage of bonus, are Exts- L and LI- The annual accounts and balancesheets for the two years 1964 and 1965 are Ext- B and C. There is reference in these annual accounts to a portion of the rash balance of the company being held in the United Kingdom and in the evi- dence it has appeared that the company maintains an office in London. It han been urfled on behalf of the unions with reference to item H(e) of the Second Schedule of the Payment of Bonus Act, that the expenditure relating to the London offlca should be added back in computing the gross profit- Item 3(e) of the Second Schedule mentions "Loss or expenditure relating to any business situated outside India": this amounl is to be added back in computing the gross profit. On behalf of tho company however it has been claimed that there Is no separate business carried on by the London office, but the London office only serves &s the agency of the Statesman Limited in England for collecting news and some advertisements and distributing issues of the Statesman Weekly which are printed in India and sent to the London office for distribution to the subscribers there. According to MW 1, J. F- Dastoor, Chief Accountant of thf Statesman, no profit and loss account is drawn up In respect of the London office. But a firm of auditors audits the receipts and expenditure and certifies the correctness of the accounts- It appears from the evidence of MW 1—that the expenses of the London office are consolidated with similar expenses in India, for Instance rent paid for the London office in included In the figure for "rents, rates and taxes", and salaries for the staff for the London office are included In the item "salaries, wattes and bonus" for the company as a whole. From the Calcutta office, monthly remittances have to be made to meet the expenses of the London office, but the question of loss does not arise as no separate business is being run by the London office. The work done there is used for the purpose of obtaining mrtcrial for publication of the daily Statesman. In view of the circumstances, I must accent the contention of the management that there is no separate bvsiness done at the London office and therefore the expenditure relating to the London office is not to be added back in arriving at the gross profits.
6 Next, the unions have raised objection to deduction of "Gratuity paid ana debited directly to Provision". The computation of allocable surplus for 1964. Ext T> shows that Rs. 2,20.000 has been added back as "provision for pensions and retiring gratuities" and Rs. 2,13,601 has been deducted as gratuity paid and debited clhwtlv to provision. The corresponding figures for 198.1 (Ext. LI) are Rs 2.30.000 and Ri. 5,23,954. The item "Provision for pensions and rc+irlnfl: gratuities" apnears as one of the items in Schedule 8 of the Annual accounts Bxt B and Ext. C. The expenditure for gratuity paid during the year debited rHrectly to provision in Included In th^ figure for "Sundry provisions", which fs thp last Ifein of Schedule 7 of Ext. B and Ext. C. It has been explained on behalf 01 the mana^ment that as the retiring gratuities which have to be paid our may varv considerably from venr to year, the company has adonted the svstp'Yi of keepme- snoroxImaWv the samp amount each year under the head 'Provision for Pensions and Retiring pratuitv' and thus building uo a reserve from which the actual expenditure on account of pensions ^nd Ljraluilk-j Is
4640 'HE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16. 1%7/AGRAHAYANA S>3, 1889 [PARI I I-made- The figure for "Sundry provisions", which includes provision for pensions and retiring gratuities and some other provisions, is Rs- 13,42,083 in the accounts of 19u'4 and Rs. 18,88,729 in the accounts of 1905. This represents the balance niter the addition of the provision for pension and retiring giatuJtics during the year, and the deduction of the gratuities paid out during the year. Tht; objec- tion is mainly to the deduction of the sums oX Rs 2,13,601 and Rs. 5,23.054 In arriving at the gross profit- The management daimed to have made the deduc- tions under Item 6(d) of the Second Schedule of Payment of Bonus Act, via expenditure or loss debited directly to reserve. On behalf of Ihe unions it has been argued by Sri D. L. Sen Gupta as well ag Shri A. P. Chutterjee that the expenditure on account of payment of gratuity was crediied not lo any reserve but to a provision, namely sundry provisions which includes provision for pen- sions and retiring gratuities. But in the payment of Bonus Aft, strict distinction between reserve and provision is not maintained- Thus II may be pointed out that in the Second schedule Item 2(e) reads "provision foi any other reserve"- It is under this heading namely item 2(c) that the provision for gratuities has been added back. Thus provision for retiring gratuities and pensions ia treated as provision for a reserve. Accordingly there is no reason why the expenditure credited directly to that head should not be treated as expenditure debited directly to reserve. I therefore negative the objection relating to the deduction of expenditure on account of gratuity paid and debited direct to the provision for retiring gratuities and pensions. The expenditure is an expenditure that 11)f company makes under its service rules, and there Is no reason 10 disallow ihe same.
7- It has next been urged on behalf of the unions that ex gratia payments made by the company in order to oiT-set the loss which some employees would surfer on account of the application of the Payment of Bonus Art or Oulinance and the bonus paid to employee:-; outside the scope of the Payment of Bonus Act, havinji come out of the profits should be added back in arriving at the groas profits. This objection relates particularly to the computation for the year end- ing ."1st December, 10G5. In the computation for 19fi4, Ext- L, the whole of the bonus which was paid in 1904 according to the company's own rules for 1he year 1963 has been added back, this sum being Rs. 10.18,145 less Rs. 3.05,000 kept as provision for bonus In the previous year. The figure shown in Ext- L v.nder the heading "bonus charged to accounts" Is Rs. 10.43-145; this figure is made up of three items shown in the break up statement, Ext. N, namely bonus paH to all members of the staff in 1064, Rs. 10,18,145 plus bonus provided for the year Rs. 3,SO,000 less provision for bonus in the previous year Rs. 3.0.ri,000 The figure mentioned in Ext. L might be more conveniently broken up Into two namely provision for bonus under 2 fa1) of the Second Schedule. Rs. 3,30-000. and bonus paid to employees in respect of previous accounting year less provision for bonus made in the previous year under item 3(a), Rs. 7.13,145- In the com- mutation for the year 1964 no question arises as to ex-gratia payment having In be added back or payment of bonus to staff outside the scope of the Payment of Bonus Act having to be added back, because the bonus paid to all the staff has been added back, in the commutation. In the computation for 3965, Ext. LI, the provision for bonus Rs. 7.00,000 has been added back and bonus paid to employees namely Rs. 8,9.4,472 has been added back, and the provision for bonus made'in the icc'ount for 1064 namely Rs. 3.30.000 has been deducted. Ext. M however shows ex-nratia payment to employees in addition to the bonus cal- culated under the Payment of Bonus Act. Rs. 1,06.021, and bonus to members of the staff outside thf scorjp of the Bonus Act. Rs 81,250, total RE. 1.07,271. This amount has not been added back In the computation for 1965, Ext. L,l, and It Is the contention of Shrl D. L. Sen Gupta as well as Shri A. P. ChatteHee uooearlng for the unions that the amount should be added back tn prrivinc? at Ihe gross profit because they were paid out of the cross nroflt. Shrl P. P. Oln walla appearing on behalf of the company has ureed that the computation for th" year 1064 was ma^e under the Payment of Bonus Ordinance and thp commu- tation for 1965 under the Payment of Bonus Act, and there 1s a distinction hotwopn IVie wording of Item 3fa"! of Second g/>hprinip nf t^p O-HInonec and the cnrresnondlnr wordinrr In +he Act. Item 3fat of the Second Srbnrtuio of Ihe pr-^TiflTVp tjtintVlv reads "Bonus nnlrl In rpgeect of nrpvloii"! accniintfni? V*"BT" vtfhorM to Employees In respect of previous accounting vpnrg". T^o word 'pmryiovee* Is flcflnpfl in Koftlni 9. CIBUIP 13 of -HIP Pqvmont of Ttonns Act, nq mpnnlnc o ^f"or> r>r(T">'rtvpd on n aqiarv or wnnc not exceeding Iftoo/- r>er mpnsPtn ir" nnv Wirlnct-ry tn do any skilled or unskilled, manual, supervisory, managerial, administrative, technical or clerical work, Section 12 of the Act provides that where the salary or wage of an employee exceeds Rs. 750 per mensem the bonus payable to such
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAIIAYANA 25, ]8S(J 4(^41employee is to be computed as if his salary was Rs. 750/- per month only. Ac coraingly, bonus calculated for employees drawing between 750/- and 1600/- has to be calculated on the basis that they are drawing Rs. 750/- only per month and therefore the bonus paid lor the part of their salary above Rs. 750/- per month is not bonus within the meaning of Payment of Bonus Act. The charts furnished by the company shows that the ex-gratia payment was made not only to employees drawing between Rs. 750/- and Rs 1600/- per month, but also to lower paid employees from those drawing Rs- 140/- p.m. as basic pay in 1984 and Rs. 60/- p.m. as basic pay in 1965, to compensate them for the loss they were incurring because of the application of the Payment of Bonus Ad. But tnose payments were, according to Shri Ginwalla, ad hoc cx-gratia_ payment not coming cut of the allocable surplus. Employees drawing above E's. 1600/-, per month are clearly not employees within the meaning of the Act- Accordingly, Shri Ginwalla has contended that there is no scope for adding back the ex-gratia payments which were made to employees so that they might not lose by the application of the Payment of Bonus Act. and similarly there is no scope for adding back the bonus which was paid to employees drawing above Rs. 1600/ per month. In a strict literal sense no doubt the contention of Shri Ginwalla is correct, but I think that the interpretation should not be made en the strict letter of the law but in a wider sense so that the te~m 'employees' in item 3(a) of the Second schedule of the Payment of Bonus Act should be taken to mean not merely employees as defined in the Payment of Bonus Act but should be interpreted to mean all the members of the staff employed by the company to whom bonus may be paid; otherwise it may be possible for the management to divert a good deal of the profit bv paying excessive bonus to the higher paid staff. The company is ni d^u'if" en+iV^d to nvv" br>vm" to the hi^bpr nvd <;+auiing the additional sum which mav he due to any employee as bonus. I therefore uphold this objection on behalf of the unions and hold that the ex-eratia payment and pavment to employees outside the scone of the Pavment of Bonus Act should be added back in computing gross profit, but any additional bonus found payable to employees should be adjusted against the ex-gratia payment made to them and onlv such additional amount should be paid as may exceed the ex-gratia payment made.
8. It has next been urged on behalf, of the unions that income tax return and the assessment order bv the Income Tax Officer not having been filed by the com- pany, the figures for depreciation in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax and Development rebate cannot be accepted and that no deduction should therefore be allowed on account of deoreciation and development rebate. I do not however find that there is any substance in this contention. According to the evidence, assessment order has been cashed in respect of accounts for the year ending 31st December, 1904 but assessment order has not yet been passed for the year ending 31st December. 1965. Moreover, under the Payment of Bonus Act, bonus has to be computed and declared within 8 months from the close of the accounting year under Sec- 19 (b) of the Payment of Bonus Act. Generally no assessment order fay the Income Tax office could be had before the expirv of 8 months from the end of the accounting yea^. According-, it cannot be said that the assessment order of the income tax return is relevant for the purpose of ascertaining the figure for depreciation or development rebate- The company has produced detailed calculations of the depreciation for the years 1964 and 1965 vide Ext. O and Ol and detailed calculation of the development rebate for the years 1964 and 1965 vide Exts P and PI. For 1964 the oroviMon for depreciation in the annual accounts and balance-sheet is Rs. 5,63,950. This figure has been added back as against depreciation deducted in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act, viz. Rs. 5.46.678. There is no reason for disallowing this amount. Similarly in the annual accounts for the year 1964 provision for deve- lopment rebate reserve is Rs. 25.000; as against that the development rebate as calculated according to the provisions of Income Tax Act comes to Rs. 31,981. The reserve has to be calculated at not less than 75 percent of the development rebate, vide Sec 33(3) (a) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly there is no reason to reject the figure for development rebate in the computation statement Ext. L
4642 I HE GA Z E T TE OF !NDIA r DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-Similarly, for the year 1965 as against depreciation shown In the annual accounts Ra. 5,62,044, which has been added back, the depreciation according to the Income Tax Act which has been deducted is Rs. 5,63,120. The figure was arrived at by calculation as shown in Ext. CM and there is no reason to reject the figure Ine development rebate reserve provided fa that year is Rs- 85,000. As against that the development rebate has been calculated at Rs. 82,166. The figure rrust be allowed as correct-
p. The next objection relates to the figure for return on Share capital. Under the Third Schedule, item l(il), a return of 8.5 percent Is allowable on the paid up equity share capital as at the commencement of the accounting year The two commutation statements £xts. L and LI show the return on capual at 8.5 percent aa Rs. 5,10,850, t^e total paid up capital being Rs. 60,10,000. It has however been pointed out by Shri Sen Gupta and Shri Chatterjee that 60,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 100/- each were issued as fully paid in pursuance of a contract without payment being received in cash, as mentioned in the annual accounts themselves, and it is only the remaining 100 shares which were paid for in cash. u has therefore been urged that no return should be allowed on 60 lakhs of the Hbare capital. Schedule i of the annual accounts show that goodwill acquired by the company was valued at Rs. 45,77,033 but most of this amount has been iirittcn off and the present value of the goodwill is shown as Its 1 00 000 The witnesses mr the management examined before the tribunal have stated that with- out reference to the original agreement they cannot say against what assets the 00,000 culinary shares were Issued as fully paid. Presumably it was for the acquisition of the: goodwill valued at about 45 lakhs and other tangible assets like lands and buildings, Shri Ginwalla has urged that the Statesman Lid- acquired the assets of some ether papers like the Friend of India and the Englishman, and instead of paying the agreed purchase price In cash, Issued fully paid up shares of that value, and the position is the same as if the pavment was made in cash iwd the shares also were paid for in cash. Shri Chatterjee and Shri Sen Gupta lias urged that if 45 lakhs out of 60 lakhs worth of assets acquired consisted oi 1'oodwilJ, which is intangible, the shares issued in lieu thereof should not bo ileemed to be fully paid up. But goodwill is recognised as an asset capable of being valued by businessmen and Chartered Accountants. It is also recognised In ftw. and by judicial decisions, e.g. AIR 1961 SC 10JO (M/s- S- C. Cambatta & Co. Ltd. v Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, Bombay). The Supreme Court referred 10 Lord Eldon's observation in an English case that goodwill meant the proba- bility that the old customers would resort to the old place, and Lord Macnaughten's observation in another case that goodwill meant the benefit and advantage of the good name, reputation and connection of a business, which brings in custom: the fjtupreme Court sent back the case for proper valuation of the goodwill, observing that the Excess Profits Tax tribunal was wrong In valuing the goodwill merely at tlie value to the business of the leasehold which had been acquired, along with other assets by the subsidiary from the primary company. Accordingly the 60,000 ordinary shares which were Issued as fully paid up' cannot be regarded as of no value because the greater part of the assets acquired in lieu of the shares consisted oi' the goodwill of the papers taken over by the Statesman. All along the shares have been treated as fully paid up and dividends are being paid on the same- Accordingly, there is no reason to refuse the return of 85 nercent on the value of these 60,000 ordinary shares.
10- Shri Sen Gupta has referred to an item of Rs- 20,583 being payment of iirrear sales tax included as expenditure for the year ended S^t December 1965 and shown in Schedule 11 of Ext C. This sum of Rs. 20,582 was paid on account Of arrear sales tax relating to previous years which was held payable by a Com- mercial Tax Officer and had to be paid in 1065- It has been urged that this figure ou1}. It is however difficult to ascertain precisely what amount of sales tax would be yiyable in resueel of transactions of the year 1965: iust as arrears of sales tax relating to the rjrevl >us year had to be paid in 1965. similarly arrears of t,-\\*s tax of 196B mgv h:>ve been naid in 196fl or 1967 or may be payable in a future year. Under the PuvmenL of Bonus Act, direct taxes have to be computed on the profits of the year for which the computation is belntf made. The direct taxes are Income tax, the super profit tax, the company's profit surtax and agri- cultural income tax and nnv other tnx which thp Central Government may declare 10 be a direct tax- There is nothing to show that sales tax hn= been declared to be a direct tax within the meaning of Payment of B-mus Act, Accordingly 111 this respect I negative the contention raised on behalf of the unions.
11- II has been urged on behalf of the unions that the deduction of tax- allowed by the Income Tax authority on the bonus paid or payable should be added back
SFC, 9(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA £5, 1889 4643in computing the allocablc surplus. It appears however that the company in mak- ing calculations for income tax has alrady deducted the bonus paid before calcula- ting the tax. Thus according to the computation Ext- L lor the year 1964 the profits after the deduction of depreciation and development rebate come to KS. 48,00,794- The company did not calculate the income tax on this sum. Ext- Q shows the computation of the income tax and sur-tax for the accounting year 1964- It shows that the tax was calculated on 38,56,805; the sum of Rs- 10.43.145 added back in Ext. L as provision for bonus or bcnus paid for the previous year was not added back in computing the income for the purpose of calculating the income tax, but certain small sums e.g., items usually disallowed by the income tax authorities were added. The same is the case with the computation of income tax for the year 1965, Thus the company has already deducted the rebate which the company would get on account of bonus paid or payable and therefore there can be no question of adding back such rebate in calculating the allocable surplus.
12. The witness, MW 1, for the management hns stated that after the assessment order for the accounting year 1964 had been passed, the company moved the Central Board of Direct Taxes through the Indian and Eastern Newspapers Society and succeeded in establishing that the newspaper industry Is a manufacturing industry and has to be taxed accordingly, the taxation being on the basis of a manufacturing indutry in which the pubTic have no substantial interest i.e., in which the shares are not freely transferable. The rates of tax for such a company for 1964 would bo 50 percent for the first 10 lakhs of the income and 60 percent for the balance for the accounting year 1964, and 55 percent for the 1st 10 lakhs and CO percent of the balance for the accounting year 1965. The income tax for computing the allocable surplus was computed at a higher rate, namely at 60 per- cent of the total profit for the accounting year 19G4 and at G5 percent of the total profit for the accounting year 1965- Revised calculations of the income tax and surtax were accordingly made, and Exts. R and Rl show the difference in income lax and surtax for the two accounting years. Ext, R shows that for the accounting year 1964 the Income tax must be reduced by Rs. 1,43,246 and the surtax increased by Rs. 12,172 so that the net reduction in tax is Rs. 1,31,734. For the accounting year 1965 the income tax must be reduced by Rs- 2,04,469 but the surtax Increased by RF. 70,034; the total reduction in tax IK RS- 1,34,435, The computation of the allocable surplus for the two years must be revised accordingly.
13. On behalf of the unions Shri Ananda Gopal Benerjce a Chartered Account- ant deposed as PW 4 and he stated that certain items isf expenditure shown in the Profit and Loss account may include expenditure of capital nature, e.g. the Item lor medical and welfare expenses in Schedule 8 may Include provision for a new Bed or a new Surgical instrument which would be expenditure of a capital nature; similarly expenditure on repairs and maintenance of buildings might include ex- penditure of a capital naturu e.0. if the roof of a building was renewed comp.'etely He also stated that regarding Interest paid by the company on loans, Jt would be necessary to obtain information on the point how the capital has been utilised In order to ascertain whether the interest should be charged to revenue of capital As to the last point, however, I find that the interest on capital borrowed must always bo charged to revenue- This was decided by the Bombay High Court in AIR 1959 Bombay, 156 (Calico Dyeinng and Printing orks v Commissioner of In- come Tax, Bombay). The Income Tax Act makes a provision fnr deduction of the interest paid on borrowed capital in computing the taxable profits Sec. 36(1)(iii") and makes no distinction between a case where the capital borrowed used for acquisition of capital assets and a case where it is used for normal business ex- penditure- As regards the suggestion that expenditure Included In the medical or Welfare expenses, repairs and maintenance of buildings, etc- might Include expendi- ture of capital nature, the witness for the management has denied the suggestion and stated that the expenditure was all of a revenue nature and that this point wae also examined by the auditors and that the auditors being satisfied on the point certified that the accounts are correct- In any case there is no evidence that any of these items included expenditure of a capital nature. So the question of deducting any amount on account of supposed capital expenditure does not arise.
14 Shri A- G Banerjee In his evidence also suggested that an amount of Hs 7-50 742. shown in the Annual Accounts for 1965, Ext. C, in Schedule 8, under the sub-head "Salaries, waHcs and bonus as paid in respect of previous years, should be added back in computing the gross profit for 1965. In Schedule 8 of Ext C, the item is not clearly explained, but the item was explained by M.W. 1, J-F- Dastoor; with reference to the break up given in Ext. M; it represents the bonus paid to employees in 1965 for the previous year, Rs. 8,93,471, plus ex-gratia payment to employees Rs. 1.06.021, plus bonus to members of the stall outside the scope of the Bonus Act, R's. 81,260, less provision for bonus made in the previous years accounts Rs 3 30 000 It Is clear from the explanation that there can be no adding back of
4644 T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. IG, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART l i-the resultant amount of Rs. 7,50,742; Rs. 8,93,471 less Rs. 3,30,000 has already been added back; about the other two items, the Union's claim relating to them has duly been considered and allowed.
15- The net result Is that for the accounting year 19fi4 a correction of trie com- putation of the allocable surplus is required only In respect of admitted lower flGUres for taxes- After making this correction the allocable surplus comes to Rs. 9,71,931 which works out at 15.87 percent as against 14 6 percent declared. For the accounting year 1905 the corrections required are, firstly adding the amount of ex-gratia payments and bonus paid to stall members outside the scope of the Act and secondly, in respect of figures for Income tax surtax. According to the revised computation the allocable surplus comes to Rs. 8,92,751 which works out at 13-8 percent instead of 10.81 percent bonus declared by the company. The computations are annexed, below. The difference in bonus will now be paid to the employee-; by the company and in respect of employees to whom ex-gratia payment has been made the extra amount payable should be adjusted against the ex-gratia payment-
COMPUTATION OF ALLOCABLK SURPLUS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31-12-1964
Rs.
Rs.
1. N et Profit as p"jr Profit a nd L o ss a c c o u ni (Before d e d u c t i on of
P r o v i s i on for T u x es & D e v. R e b a t e)
. . ..
37 63 74 J
2, Ad b a ck p r o v i s i on for :
(c<) B o n us to e m p l o y e es
(£) D c p r c i a t i on
. . ..
3,30,000 6,63,950
(c) D i r e ct T a x es . - . . - . ..
(d) D e v e l o p m e nt R e b a te R e s e r ve . . . ..
(e) P e n s i on & R e t i r i ng g r a l u i iy . . . . ..
2,20,000
3, (u) B o n us p a id to e m p l o y e es in r e s p e ct of p r e v i o us a c c o u n t i ng y e ar
l;ss p r o v i s i on for p r e v i o us >var 1 0 , 1 8 , 1 4 5 - 3 , 0 5 , 0 00
{b) D o n a t i o ns in excess n f t he a m o u nt a d m i s s i b le f or I n c o me T ax
18,29,320
7,13,14? 2,225
55,93,060
6. (d) Deduct e x p e n d i t u re d e b i t ed d i r e c t ly to r e s e r v es :
g r a t u i ty p a id a nd d e b i t ed d i r e ct to P r o v i s i on
2,13,601
G r o ss P r o f it
53,79,459
Prior Charter :
D e p r e c i a t i on
. . . . . . ..
5,46,673
D e v e l o p m e nt R e b a te . . . . . ..
5,78,665
31,937
48,00,794
I n c o me T ax ( T Oe E x t. R .)
=5.31,698
22.37-39^
S u r t ax {Vide E x r. R)
2,94,300
R e t u rn on P a id up C a p i t al ur, S . s ' , 'i . . ..
5,10,850 22,69,096
R e t u rn on R e s e r ve (n) C/u . . . . ..
1,39377 6,5^227
A v a i l a b le S u r p l us • 16,18,860
A l l o c a h le S u r p l us at 6 0%
9,71,32 £
B o n us c a l c u l a t ed on g r o ss s u l n r k 's \\ n r . e s, R s. 6 1 , 1 1 , 7 87 IJ-VIAJ E x t. H 4 ')
15-87%
S EC 3(11)] T HE G A Z E T TE OF I N D IA : D E C. 16, 1 9 6 7 / A G R A 1 I A Y A NA X5, i 8 89 4 6 45
C O M P U T A T I ON OF A L L O C A B LE S U R P L US F OR T HE Y E AR E N D ED 3 1 - 1 2 - 1 9 65
Rs.
Rs.
1. N ;t profit as p.-r Profit a nl 1,093 A c c o u nt ( I v f o re d e d u c t i on
of p r o v i s i on for taK;s) . . . . . . ..
28,67,107
2. Add b a ck p r o v i s i on for :
. . . . . ..
(a) B o n us to e m p l o y e es . . . . . .. (b~) D e p r e c i a t i on (c) D e v e l o p m e nt R e b a te R e s e r ve . . . .. (it) P e n s i on a ni R e t i r i ng g r a t u i ty
7,00,000 5,62,044 65,000 2,30,000 ^
3- Add back :
(a) Bonus paid to employees less provision of previous year
8,93.47^—3,30,000
5.63.472 1,87,271
(A) Ex-gratia payment and Bonus outside the scope of the Act (c) Donation in excess of the amount admissible for Income-
tax
2,300 23,10,087
5i>77>i94
Deduct
6(d) E x p e n d i t u re d e b i t ed direct 10 a R e s e r ve G r a t u i ty p a id a nd
d e b i t ed direct to P r o v i s i on . . . . ..
5,23^54
G r o ss Profit .
46,53,240 Prior charges
5 ^ 1 29
D e p r e c i a t i on . . . . . . . .. D e v e l o p m e nt R e b a te
82,166 6,45)295
40,07,945 I n c o me t ax ( v i de E x t. R l .) S u r t ax ( v i de E x t. R l .)
17.40,531 1,18,034 18,58,565
21,49,380 R e t u rn on p a id up C a p i t al (ir K- 5 % . . .. R e t u rn on R e s e r ve at 6% . .. . . ..
6,61,461
5.10,850 1,50,611
I4.87J9J9 8,82,951 A v a i l a b le S u r p l us . . . . . . .. A l l o c a b lc s u r p l us ( 6 0% of a v a i l a b le s u r p l u s) . . .. B o n us ( c a l c u l a t ed on g r o ss s a l a r i e s / w a g e s) R s. 6 4 7 4, 0 95 ( V i de
E x t. I)
13'8%
Issue No. 3— Dearness allowance
16. Before setting out the claim made by the unions it will be convenient to set out the existing scheme of dearness allowance and enhanced dearness allowance and interim relief now followed by the Statesman Ltd. The rates of basic dearness allowance are set out in Ext G and are as follows:—
,, 80 per cent subject to a minimum Upto Rs. 100
of Rs. 37.
101—110 111—120 121—130 131—140 141—250 251—326 327—400 401—500 501 and above
.. Rs. 80 .. Rs. 83 . . Rs, 87 .. Rs. 91 , , 65 per cent. .. Rs. 163 ., Rs. 50 per cent. .. Rs. 200 , . 40 per cent.
This rate of dearness allowance was in force from 1952. In 1958 there was a settlement with the unions about a scheme of enhanced dearness allowance vide Ext. Gl, dated 12th March 1058. By this agreement the existing rate of dearness allowance was deemed to be based on the cost of living index for the 6 months
4646 E GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 15, 19G7/AGRAIIAYANA 25, 1889 [PART II-Immediately prior to January, 1952 and this average was deemed to be 334' 25 on the basis of 1939=100. It was agreed that for every 10 point rise in the cost of living, above 384.25 there would be 2£ per cent enhanced dearness allowance calculated on the basis dearnesa allowance subject to a minimum of Hs. 2-50 for each 10 point rise. It was agreed that adjustments would be made 6 monthly on the average index of cost of living, for the previous 6 months. In 10G1-62 this scheme of enhanced dearness allowance was slightly altered; the datum line i.e. cost of living index at which the basis dearness allowance was deemed to be fixed, was lowered from 384.25 to 374.25 and enhanced . dearness allowance became chargeable on the difference above 374.25. Ext. A and Al are agreements made in 1961 on this point with the two unions in Calcutta and Ext, A2 is a copy of the agreement made with the union in Delhi on the same lines in January, 1962. Next in April or May, 1964 there were agreements, Exts. A3. A4 and AS by which the management agreed to the payment of an interim relief calculated at 10 percent of the basic salary plus bask D.A. subject to a minimum of Es, 15 and a maximum of Rs. 30 per month. This interim relief was made payable from 1st January 1964 and from a month curlier in certain .special cases. In May If65 the management agreed to give a Canteen allowance at 50 nP. per head for each working day vide the agreements Exts. A6 and A7. At the time of the hearing the enhanced dearness allowance was being calculated with reference to the Index of 595 which is 220 above the agreed revised datum line. Therefore the workmen were receiving 55 percent of the basic dearness allowance as enhanced D.A. subject to a minimum of Rs. 55 in addition to the interim relief and the canteen allowance. The company also has a system of December payment consisting of 5 percent of the basic pay for the year, plus 12 days' pay and dearness allowance; the 5 per cent of basic pay for the year is treated as deferred accumulated dear- ness allowance, vide the award of the 6th Industrial Tribunal published in the Calcutta Gazette of August 21, 1952; and the twelve days' pay and D.A. is supposed to be in lieu of gazetted holidays, not enjoyed by the employees. Thus an additional 5 per cent of the basic pay may be deemed to be paid as dearness allowance. The scales of basic pay received a slight upward revision in 1961 vide the agreements Exts, A, Al and A2, Some of the revised scales are as follows:—
., B0— 4—88—5—113—7—148—10—178 ., 120— 7—155—10—205 ,. 170—10—280 .. 120—7—155—10—275—5—280 .. 37—60
Clerks C grade Clerks B grade Clerks A grade Stenographers Peons
The revised scales for the employees in the Rotary department and workshop department are also mentioned in annexures to Ext, A, Al and A2.
17 The two unions of Calcutta stated in their written statement that the Statesman Ltd. adopted the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scale of deiirness allowance initially, but that in 1952 the company stopped giving increment in the scale of dearness allowance according to the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme, saying that the finances of the company did not permit of giving dearness allowance at such a liberal scale and therefore the dearness allowance remained stationery from 1952 until the scheme of enhanced dearness allowance came into force with effect from 1st January, 1958. These unions claimed that the company had enough financial ability to pay dearness allowance at the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scale, and claimed that some other firms situated in the neighbourhood of the Statesman office were paying dearness allowance under the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme. Accordingly, these unions claimed dear- ness allowance at that rate. The union of New Delhi Employees also referred to t hf B eS Chamber of Commerce scheme, but also stated that comparable con-
a fixed slab system whfch was revised from time to time, the slabs remaining the Lme between 195^ and 1958, Towards the end of 1957 claim for more dearness X w a n ce was made and before the Conciliation Officer a settlement was made SetnthTcomvany and the clerical staff represented by the Statesman Clerical
Kfiar swfcwsw SSJSCJS? S srs1 sssr SKSS
JTEC. 3(ii)J THE GAZETTE Ol" INDIA: DKC. 16, 1967/AGR-\fIAVANA 2,5, 1SS9 4647enhanced clearness allowance. Thereafter before any recommendation was made by the Central Wage Board for Working Journalists and Non-journalists, the company adopted the scheme of interim relief with effect from 1st January 1964 or 1st December, 1%3. The management "tated that it was unable to pay dear- ness allowance according to the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme and that such a scheme was unjustified on merits and in-operative in law.
18. In the written statement the- management did not explain why the claim %vas inoperative in law. At the hearing it was pointed out that in each of the 3 agreements regarding the modification of the enhanced dearncss allowance scheme, namely Ext. A, dated 15th Juiy 1061 with the Clerical Staff Union. Calcutta, Ext. Al, dated 29th December 19G1 with the Statesman Employees Union, Calcutta and Ext. A2, dated 23rd January 10C2 with ihe Statesman Employees Union, New Deini, it was ngrecd thr.t the terms and conditions of settlement would be binding on tne parties and would remain in force from ]&l July 1S61 to 31st December, 1966, and it would continue to remain operative thereafter so long as either party did not give notice in writing to the other party intimating the intention to terminate the terms and conditions of the settlement. But even before trie period agreed by the 3 agreements expiied i.e., tven before 31kt December, 1966, the unions laiseu me dispute as regards dearncss allowance and other matters along with their dispute relating to bonus. PW1 Sailondra Nath Banrrjee stated that the dispute raised by the union regarding dearness allowance, medical benefits and leave went to the Conciliation Officer, that >bo m^imgemenl's representativ-c alao appeared before the Conciliation Officer but there was no sehiement before him. From the written statement of the Calcutta union it appe&n that the question as to bonus, deatnesa Government of West Eengal by order ot inc West Bengal Government dated 9th allowance, medical benefits and leave wcic lirst referred to 5th Industrial Tribunal, September, ISfib. Thei'. after thai, reference was withdrawn and the present reference was made1 by the Central Government on the same issues by their order dated 25th February, 1967. ft is clear, therefore, that in spite of the agreements, the dispute as to dearncss allowance was raised about the middle of 1966 although the existing agreements were to last until 31st December, 1966. It has, therefore, been urged that the claim in respect of dearness allowance is inoperative in law. Section 1S(2I of the Industrial Disputes Act provides that a settlement shan tie binding for such period as is agreed upon by the parties and shall oontinue 10 be binding after the expiry of the period aforesaid until the expiry of two montns from the date on which a notice in writing of an intention to terminate the settle- ment is given by one of the parties to the ofber party or parties. Shri Sen Gupta appearing on behalf of the Calcutta Unions has urged that Section 19(2) has no application because the agreements, Ext. A, Al and A2 were not settlements within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes AcL. It appears from each of these memo- randums of settlement, Exts. A, Al and A2, that the settlements were made in accordance with Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, i.e., not in the course of the conciliation proceedings but direct between the parties. Though Section 18(1) provides that a settlement arrived at by agreement between employers and the workmen otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceedings shall be binding on the parties to the agreement, Shri Sen Gupta has referred to the defi- nition of the terms 'settlement' in clause (p) of Section 2 of the Act, which provides that 'settlement' means a settlement arrived at in the course of conciliation proceedings and includes a written agreement between the employers and the workmen arrived at otherwise than in the course of conciliation Droceedings where the agreement has been signed by the parties in the manner prescribed and a copy thereof has been sent to the appropriate Government and the Conciliation Officer, Shri Sen Gupta has further referred 1o Rule 58(4) of Central Rules which pro- vides that where a settlement is arrived between an employer and his workmen otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceedings, the parties to the settle- ment shall jointly send a copy thereof to the Central Government, Chief Labour Commissioner, Central, New Delhi and the Regional Commissioner, Central and to the A.L.C., Central, concerned. There is a corresponding rules in the Rules under- the Act made by the West Bengal Government. Shri Sen Gupta has urged that these agreements, Exts. A, Al and A2 were not jointly sent by the parties to Government or to the Labour Commissioner and therefore these agreements are not settlements within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act. Shri Ginwalla has urged that the Act itself merely requires that a copy of the agreement made should be sent to the appropriate Government and the Conciliation Officer, and it is not required that the copy thereof should be sent jointly by the parties, and that even if copies of the agreement were not sent jointly by the tmrtics that would not stand in the way of the" agreement being a settlement within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, if copies of the agreement were sent by the management to the appropriate Government and the Conciliation Officer. The question whether management had sent copies of these three agreements to the appropriate govern- ment and the Labour Commissioner concerned not having been raised in the
4 6 4 8T l IE GAZETTE OF INDIA; DEC. 16, 19G7/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-written statement of the unions and not having been raised also during the examination of witnesses, the management did not have the opportunity of proving that they sent copies of the 3 agreements to the Government and the Labour Com- missioner as required by the Act. Shvi Ginwalla showed some office copies of letters from the llle of the management showing that copies of these agreements were in fact sent to the appropriate Government and the Labour Commissioner concerned. Shri Ginwalla has also urged that the unions not having taken the objection that copies of the agreements were not sent to the- appropriate authorities cannot be allowed to argue that copies were not sent to the appropriate authorities. There being no evidence to the contrary, I may presume that copies were in fact sent by the management to the appropriate authorities, concerned and therefore the agreements are settlements within the meaning of the Act, and it is not material that the copies of the agreements were not jointly sent by the two parties to the appropriate authorities. It has however been urged by Shri Sen Gupta that submitting the demands relating to a better scale of dearness allowance itself amounted to giving notice of intention to terminate the settlement. In this con- nection Shri Sen Gupta has referred to 1962 I LLJ 661 (Workmen of Western India Match Co., v. Western India Match Company). In thut case without giving formal notice under Sec. 19(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act terminating the settlement, the workmen presented, a charter of demands in respect of scales of pay and dear- ness allowance about which there had been consent award passed on agreement oetween the parties. Subsequently tho parties agreed to get the dispute relating to scales of pay and dearness allowance referred for adjudication. The Supreme Court held that hi the circumstances the absence of a formal notice under Section 19(2) of the Act terminating the settlement was immaterial. Thus the Supreme Court did not say that mere submission of a charter of demands amounted to giving notice of termination of the settlement, but relied on the subsequent con- duct of the Management in agreeing to a reference to adjudication. In the present case also the management did not object to the reference for adjudication of the issue relating to dearness allowance along with the issues for bonus and leave rules and medical benefits, Shri Sen Gupta has urged that in the circumstances it should be held that the company waived the want of formal notice terminating the agreements. In 1962 I LLJ 85, Workmen of Continental Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Management, the Calcutta High Court held that while Section 19(2) requires an express representation in writing terminating an agreement and a submission of a charter of demands is not enough, a notice under Section 19(2) could be waived by the party to whom the notice was to be sent; and where the company took part in Conciliation proceedings on the charter of demands and never raised the objection before the Conciliation Officer that the old settlement was still in force, the company must be taken to have waived the notice. I must agree that In the present case also the company docs not appear to have raised the objection before the Conciliation Officer that the claim as to a better scale of dearness allowance was not maintainable because of the agreements, and therefore the want of express notice terminating the agreement must be deemed to have been waived.
1!) In sunport of the claim th°.t the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme of dearness allowance should be adophed. tho two Calcutta Unions stated expressly in paragraph Z7 and 28 that the scheme had been adopted by the company from 181C and was in force until 1CK52 when tho company represented that it was not able to pay deurnoss allowance under that scheme. But tho unions have not pro- duced nny satisfactory evidence to show that the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scale of dearness allowance was ever adopted by the company. The rate of basic DA set out previously was in force in the Statesman office between 1952 to 1958. In 1952 the dearness allowance upto Rs. 100 was BO per cent which under the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme would bo payable when the cost of Jiving index stood at 340. But townrds the end of lf>51 and beginning of 1952 ih"? cost of living index was substantially higher than 340. The average of the cost .of living index during the last 6 months of 1Q51 was 3R4 ns stated in Ext. Gl, the memo- randum of settlement dated 12th March 1968, On behalf of the unions, PW1, Sallendra Nath Banerjee cave evidence that the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme was followed by the company only until February 1949. It appears that the witness chose a date when the cost of living index would fit in with 8O1 percent dearness allowance on fist 100 payable in accordance with the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme. The change from 1952 to 1949 shows that the Unions are not sure of the position. Further, there is a finding in a judgment of the Labour Appellate Tribunal that the Statesman Ltd. had never adopted the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme, Various issues concerning the Statesman employees relating to scales of pay, dearness allowance, leave, medical expenses, etc. were referred by the Government of West Bengal to the 6th Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal lor decision. A section of the employees entered into an agreed settlement with the company and an award was made relating to the remaining employees v/ho conti- nued the contest. That award was published, on 2nd August 1952. There was an
SEC. 3(H)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 1G, 19G7/AGRA1-IAY ANA 25, 188(J 4649appeal to the Labour Appellate Tribunal by the Press Employees Association, Calcutta, The judgment of the Labour Appellate Tribunal is reported in 1953 Labour Appeal cases, page 601. At page BO5 In paragraph 5 of the judgment the Labour Appellate Tribunal observed us follows:—
"Although the company is a member of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce it has never adopted the scales of dearness allowance recommended by that body. That body made the recommendation to its member firms for voluntary acceptance. Simply because the company is a member of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce workmen cannot claim as a matter of right or as a matter of course those scales'".
The L.A.T. thereafter recited the existing scales of dearness allowance oi the com- pany. It appears that at that time the minimum dearness allowance for a member of the subordinate staff was Rs. 33. By the agreement between the company and a section of the employees referred to before this minimum was increased to Rs, 37 and the Presiding Officer of the Gth Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal gave effect to the agreed minimum, dearness allowance in respect of the employees who carried on the contest, but otherwise did not change the scales of dearness allowance than in force. The Labour Appellate Tribunal refused to interfere with the decision of the Presiding Officer of the 6th Industrial Tribunal, I must accordingly find that the company did not ever pay dearness allowance according to the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme but had its own system of dearnoss allowance.
20. On behalf of the management it has been urged by Shri Ginwalla that the llnance.i of the Statesman Limited are not such as would enable it to bear the burden of dearness allowance according to the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme. The scheme according to the company's written statement would involve the payment of an additional sum of about Rs. 52,000 per month for the Calcutta office only and Rs. Z4.CKJ0 per month for the Delhi office. In other words extra expenditure would come to about 9 lakhs per year. PW2—T.M, Nagarajan stated that tho Central Wage Board for Working Journalists has classed the Statesman as1 Class A paper. The first Central Wage Board foi Working Journalists put 4 papers in India in class A, namely the Times of India, The Statesmen, The Hindu and the Hindustan Standird; and the Second Wage Board placed only two papers in class A namely, The Tirnra of India and the Statesman, the classification being made according lo the total revenue eirncd by thu company. PW2 claimed that the Statesman must be able to pay thf same rate of dearness allowance as i.s paid by the Times of India, even if the management cannot afford to pay under the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme. The management gave evidence of extra expenditure that they would have to shoulder for various reasons. Thui, from the evidence of MW '—J. F. Dnsloor it appears that the Statesman will havr> to incur an estimated additional expenditure of 19 lakhs per year as the result of devaluation of the Indian currency in making payments for Newsprint and in paying foreign correspondents, etc. The witness also stated that, when the recommendul ion of the Ct'-itrol Wage- Board for Workinft Journalists and non- Journalists is implemented on additional expenditure of 18 lakhs per year would be required in the beginning and this would increa-e in subsequent years as incre- ments under the scales are earned. We are however concerned with the position before the recommendations of the Central Wage Board for Working Journalists and non-Journalists are implemented, because when those scales arc implemented naturally the extra dearness allowance if any which may be awarded by the Tribunal would cease to have effect, as thr> scnles of pay and rates of scales of dearness allowance recommended by the Central Wage Board -would become operative-. But it cannot bo overlooked 1 hat on account of devaluation even though the Government have granted certain concessions in the matter of imnort duty of newsprint, the Statesman Ltd. like other newspapers companies will have to incur a lot of extra expenditure. The Statesman does not really have a large surplus- of profits. In calculating the bonus, it h^s been found that the profits are not sufficient for award of the maximum scale of bonus. I must therefore clearly hold that the dearness allowance scheme of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce cannot be made operative in the case of the employees of the Statesman, As regards Times of India scale, the same appears from the Booklet containing the terms and conditions of service of employment of Messrs Benett Colman and Co. Ltd., Ext. 4. The Times of India has offices at Bombay and Delhi and the scale of
4650 THE GAZETTE OF TNDIA : DEC, 16, 1%7/AGRAHAYANA 25, 18B9 [PART I I-dearness allowance as at Bombay and Delhi is given at page 25 of the Booklet. The following extract is taken from the scale:—
Basic Pay
Variations of over 10 points
D.A. at Index No. 491 to 500
over 500
Rs, 90 Minium
Rs. 2 Minimum
1—99 100—130 151—200 201—300
96 percent 94 percent S3 percent 8i percent
2 to 5 percent 2 to 5 percent 2 percent 2 percent
PW2—T. M, Nagaraian in comparing the scales of the Statesman Ltd, and the Times of India stated that a peon employed in the Statesman office drawing Bs. 40 as basic pay would get Rs. 37 as basic dearness allowance, Rs. 55 as enhanced dear- ness allowance and interim allowance of Rs. 15 i.e. Rs. 107 in addition to his basic pay, whereas a peon in Times of India office drawing a basic pay of Rs, 40 would get as dearness allowance Rs. 132 there being no interim relief in the Timed of India office. He also stated that in the Statesman office an employee with basic pay of Rs. 110 would get Rs. 80 as basic D.A., and enhanced D.A, of Rs. 44 making a total remuneration of Rs. 234 whereas in the Times of India office such an employee would get D.A. at 123 percent making a total remuneration of Rs, 245.30. It should be pointed out that an employee with a basic pay of Rs, 110 in the Statesman office would get enhanced D.A. of Rs. 55 and not RE. 44 as stated by the witness and further he would get an interim relief of Rs. 19 so that his total remuneration comes to Rs. 264. He would therefore be better off than the employee in the Times of India office. The peon in addition to the remuneration mentioned would get Rs. 13 as canteen allowance provided he works for the whole month. Thus his total remuneration also would not be much lower than that of the peon in the Times of India office. Further, another 5 percent of the basic pay included in the December payments should be added in totalling the remuneration of the Statesman employees; the Times of India has no system of December payments. Moreover, the dearness allowance mentioned by the witness for the Times of India employee is for the Bombay scale of dearness allowance. Ext. 4, the Booklet of Benett Coal man & Co. Ltd. specifies that the rate of dearness allowance at Calcutta would be lower by 3 slabs from that at Bombay and Delhi, and that minimum D.A. would also be Rs. 10 less than at Bombay and Delhi. Further, when the witness was speaking of D.A. of Rs. 132 "for a peon, he must have been calculating the D.A. with reference to a cost of living index of 710, because only for 210 points rise above 500, the minimum, dearness allowance would be increased from Rs. 90 to Rs. 132, whereas for the Calcutta employees we are calculating the dearness allowance for the cost of living index of 595 to 600. It is only for people drawing above Rs. 200 as basic pay that the Times of India scale of dearness allowance is more favourable than the Statesman scale. I do not however think it necessary that the Times of India scale should be adopted for the relief of employees drawing over Rs. 200 as basic pay. The existing scale of dearness allowance in the States- man office should in my opinion continue until the same is replaced by the scales of pay and dearness allowance recommended by the Central Wage Board.
Issue No. 4—Medical Benefits
21. At present in the Statesman office a doctor attends the office for half an hour in the morning and half an hour in the afternoon and is available for con- sultation by the members of the staff at the office. There is a limited stock of medicines at the Statesman office which is given as required, and on the pres- cription of the company's doctor medicines are supplied from Messrs Frank Ross & Co. at Calcutta and from Messrs Sahib Singh at Delhi, the bills being paid by the company. The company's doctor however does not visit any employee at his house The unions in their written statement prayed that the workman should be given medical relief both for himself and his family and be reimbursed doctor's fees and cost of necessary medicines, injections, etc. and expenses for testing eye and for glasses and that in the alternative Rs. 250 in cash t>er head per year should be given to each employee as medical allowance.. P.W. 2—T. M. Nagarajan stated that the Hindustan Standard of Calcutta r>ays a cash allowance of Rs, 75 per year to each employee as medicaf allowance. In the course of hearing evidence was led that the United Commercial Bank has been giving medical relief at the rate of Rs. 125 per year to its employees at Delhi wide the evidence of P.W. 3—-Chunilal Banerjee, a Lino Operator of Statesman at Delhi office. The coTnpany in its
SEC, 3(il)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA '#, 1389 4651written statement stated that only for the Calcutta office, it paid Employees State Insurance contribution for 19G5 amounting to Rs. 36,296 and about 9,500 towards the cost of prescriptions served to the employees by Messrs Frank Ross & Co. during that year and also Rs. 6,000 for cost of medicines supplied free from the company's office dispensary and Rs. 18,136 as pay of the docfor, and compounder, the total expenditure of the Calcutta office therefore worked out at about Rs. 70,000 for 19
Issue No. 5—Leave
22. The company's leave rules for the staff, clerical and subordinate, are con- tained in the letter, Ext. E, addressed to the President, Statesman Employees Union, Calcutta by the Manager and Director of the Statesman on 13th March, 1950. The leave rules are' as follows:—
Clerical and workshop staff
(1) Privilege leave 14 days per year which may be accumu- lated for 2 years i.e. upto 28 days.
(2) Casual leave 10 days per year.
(3) 14 days medical leave with
pay per year.
(1) General leave 2 days with Subordinate staff
pay for each completed month of service.
(2) Medical leave 1 day with pay for each completed month of service.
4652 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 1G, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25. 1889 [PART I I-(3) Leave without pay 2 days for each completed month of duty (The provision for leave with- out pay for subordinate staff was made as peons from up- country wanted to stay at home for a longer period than the leave earned by them).
23. According to the unions the leave rules are very stringent and they have claimed more liberal rules, namely 30 days' privilege leave with pay per year which may be accumulated for 3 years i.e, upto 90 days. Casual leave •with pay for 12 days in a year and sick leave with full pay for one month in a year and further sick leave on half pay without limit until recovery. At the hearing P.W. 1—Sailen Banerjee for the unions made a grievance of the fact that Officers of the Statesman Ltd. are enjoying a more liberal leave, being entitled to 21 days as against 14 days earned leave granted to the clerical and subordinate staff. Tho unions have asked for the same leave rules as enjoyed by the Times of India staff. The leave rules of the Times of India staff appear in Ext. 4, the booklet setting out the service conditions of Benett Coalman & Co. Ltd. Ext. 4 shows the following leave rules for Officers:—Privilege leave 30 days; Casual leave 10 days, sick leave 1 day for every 10 days' work upto a maximum of 30 days, sectional and general holidays 10 days. For clerical staff—Privilege leave- varies with the length of service, being 20 days for men with upto 5 years service; 25 days for men who have put in over 5 but less than 10 years service and 30 days for men who have put in over 10 year's service. Casual leavo is same namely 10 days per year and sick leave varies from 24 to 30 days according to the length of service; Sectional and general holidays 10 days in a year. Shri Ginwalla has pointed out that before the 6th Industrial Tribunal in 1951-52 the employees claimed one month's privilege leave and 15 days sick leave with pay but the Pre- siding Judge considered the existing leave rules sufficiently liberal and refused to interfere with the same. Having considered the question carefully, I do not think that it is necessary to make any change so far as the rules as to casual and sick leave are concerned. But so far as privilege or earned leave is concerned, I think that the employees may enjoy the same privilege leave as the officers. namely 21 days per year, accumulable for 2 years or upto 42 days.
24. My Award therefore is aa follows:—•
(i) Tsniei; 1 & 2— Boyus for the years 1964 and 1965:
Bonus be paid for the year 1^4 at 15.87 percent and for the yenr 1C65 al 13.8 percent. In paying the additional bonus due to employees adjustments shall be made against ex-gfatia payments where made, and payment made of the excess if any of the additional bonus due over the ex-gratia payment made.
(ii) Issue No. 3—Dearness allowance;
The claim for increased dearness allowance is rejected.
(iii) Issue No. 4—Medical Benefit:
In lieu of existing benefits the employees other than the workshop staff governed by the E.S.I. Act shnll be reimbursed for medical expenses incurred for themselves and their immediate families, to the limit of Rs. 75 per year on the basis of bills certified by registered medical practitioners. Any amount not required to be drawn as reimbursement by an employee will remain at his credit, to be drawn as required in a future year. In respect of employees governed by the E.S.I. Act existing rules will continue.
(iv) Issue No. 5—Leave:
Privilege leave for the employees is increased to 21 days per year aceumulable for two years or 42 days. In other respects the leave rules will remain as they are.
25. The award as to medical benefits and leave rules shall come into forcr* with effect from 1st January, 1968. The additional bonus shall be calculated and paid within one month of the publication of tho award.
No order is made as to costs.
Dated the 20th November, 1967.
(Sd.) S. K. SEN.
Presiding Officer.
[No. 8/44/66/LRIV.J
Sec. SS.O. 4421.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1347 f 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay, in the Industrial Dispute between the Emp^yers in relation to Messrs Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works, Bombay and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on November 24th, 19fl7,
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BOMBAY..
REFERENCE NO. CGIT-27 OF 1966
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works, Bombay
ANO
Their workmen
PRESENT;
Shri A, T. Zambre—Presiding Officer.
APFXAHANCES:
For the employers.—Shri K. R. Tripathi.
For the workmen.—Shri R, A. Pandit Assistant Secretary, Transport and Doclt Workers' Union, Bombay.
STATE: Maharashtra
INDUSTRY: Major Ports.
Dated at Bombay this the 21st day of November 1967
AWARD PART II
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour and Employment by Order No.. 23(5)/66-LRIV dated 27th April 1966 referred to this tribunal the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to Messrs Shri Mankeshwar Mechani- cal Works, Bombay and their workmen represented by the Transport and Dock Workers' Union, Bombay, in respect of the matters specified in the schedule to the said order: —
SCHEDULE
"Whether the termination of services of (i) Shri Ramdwar Bhulai (ii) Shri Bansraj Hariprasad (iii) Shri Bhagwan Bhoja (iv) Shri Vithobha Sandipan (v) Jothashanker Hariharnath Pandey (by Messrs. Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works, Bombay, was justified? If not to which relief are they entitled?"
2. Out of the five workmen mentioned in the schedule the dispute in respect of the first four viz.. (i) Shri Ramdwar Bhulai (ii) Shri Bansraj Hariprasad (iii) Shri Bhagwan Bhoja and (iv) Shri Vithobha Sandipan was settled amicably and my learned predecessor Shri Salim M. Merchant had disposed of the same by his Award Part I dated 21st July 1967 and had adourncd the dispute with regard to the fifth workman under reference viz., Shri Jcthashanker Hariharnath Pandy.
3. The parties have now settled the dispute regarding the fifth workman also amicably and have submitted a joint memorandum of settlement dated 14-11-1967 marked annexure "A". By the arrangement between the parties the workman has been taken back in service with effect from February 1966 and he is entitled to continuity of service with fu]l benefit of past service. He has also been paid 15 days' wages at the rate of wages which he was entitled to for the month of May 1965 in satisfaction of hia other claims and in my opinion considering the facts and circumstances of the case the terms of settlement are fair and reasonable. I, therefore, make an Award in terms of the joint memorandum of settlement annexure "A" which shall form part of this Award.
No order as to costs,
(Sd/-) A. T. ZAMBHE. Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Bombay.
4654 T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA; DEC. ll>, 1967/AGRAIIAYANA 25, 188? [PART H-ANNEXUKE "A"
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT
BOMBAY.
REFERENCE NO, 27 OF 1966
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works
AND
Their workmen
MAY IT PLEASE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL
We, the Parties above-named reached the following settlement in this dispute and pray ttiat an award be made in terms hereof: —
Terms of Settlement
1- H is agreed that the worker by name Jethaslninker Hanharnath at Item 0 of the Schedule has been taken back in service of the company with effect from February 1966 under the arrangement dated 22nd February I960 and the worker is entitled to continuity of service with full benefit of past services.
2. It is further agreed that the worker concern shall be p"aid 15 days wages at the rate of wages which he was entitled to for the month of May 3965 in satisfac- tion of his claim arise in the present reference.
3. It Is further agreed that the worker concerned shall be paid 15 days wages 011 20th December 1967 and the period from 15th May 1965 to 23rd February 1966 being treated as leave without pay.
Dated at Bombay this 14th day of November, 1967 For the Employers in relation to For the Transport and Dock Shri Mankeshwar Mechanical Works, Bombay. Workers" Union, Eombay. (Sd.) R. A. PANDIT, (Sd.) K. R. TRIPATHI Asst. Secretary.
Before me.
(Sd/-1 A. T. ZAMBriK, Presiding Officer,
Central Government Industrial Tribunal Bombay
14/11/67.
[No. 28/5/66-LRIV.] ^ iS' ?* 4432-—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation (Department of Labour and Employment) No. SO. 1987, dated the 31st May, 1967, the Central Government being satisfied that the public Interest so required, had declared the industry for the supply of milk under the Delhi Milk Scheme to be a public utility service for the purposes of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), for a period of six months from the 22nd June, 1967;
And whereas the Central Government is of the opinion that public interest requires the extension of the said period;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub-clause (vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby declares the said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said Act, for a further period of six months from the 22nd December, 1967.
[No. F. 1/105/67-LRL]
ORDERS
New Delhi, the 23rd November 1967
S.O. 4423,—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to Messrs Santosh Chandra Banerjee and Sons (Private) Limited, Calcutta and their workmen in respect of the matters specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;
SEC. 3(Ii)] THE CAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4655-And, whereas the Central Government considers it desirable to refer the sai 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 01 1947), the Central Government hereby refers the said dispute for adjudication to the Indus- trial Tribunal, Calcutta, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.
SCHEDULE
Whether the action of the management of Messrs, Santosh Chandra Bancrjce and Sons (Private) Limited, Calcutta in terminating the services of Shri Sitaram Singh, Gearman with effect from the 10th November, 1965 was justified? Whether the action of the management of Messrs Santosh Chandra Banerjee and Sons (Private) Limited, Calcutta in keeping Shri Sitaram Singh Gearman under suspension from the 21st July 19G6 to the 7th December 19G6 after re-employment from the 7th April, 1966 was justified? If noL, to what relief is the workman is entitled to in either case?
[No. 28/85/67/LRIII.]
Nrnv Delhi, the, lith November 1967
S.O. 4434.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the Iron Ore Mines of Messrs Companhia Mineira Dempo and Souza Limited 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 said dispute for adjudication;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section (1) of secLion 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, Bombay, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.
SCHEDULE
1. Whether the present rates of wages and dearness allowance being paid to the piece-rated workmen employed in the Iron Ore Mines of Messrs Companhia Mineira Dempo and Souza Limited are adequate, keeping in view the prevailing cost of living index? If not, what should be the wages, dearness allowance nnd other allowances and whether the dearness allowance should be linked with the cost of living index for the working class?
2. Whether the aforesaid piece-rated workmen are entitled for payment of bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act for the accounting years 1964~ 65 and 1965-66? If so, what should be the quantum of bonus?
[No. 37/9/87-LRIJ
New Delhi, the 2nd December 1967
S.O. 4425.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company, Limited, Kanpur and their workmen in respect of Ihe matter specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;
And whereas the Central Government considers it desirable to refer to the- said dispute for adjudication;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 7A and clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 10 01 the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby constitutes an Industrial Tribunal of which Shri Mithan Lai shall be the Presiding Officer, with headquarters at Allahabad and refers the said dispute for adjudication to the said Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
Whether the management of Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited, was justified in denying Shri Qutab-UUaha-Khan of its Kanpur regional office, the Stenographer's Grade with effect from the 1st July I960 and promotion to the post of Assistant Superinten- dent from the 1st January 1962? If not, to what relief is he entitled?
[No. 70/14/6G-LRIV.1
4656 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 10, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART II-S.O. 4426.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the Khariachina Clay Mines of Patelnagar Minerals and Industries (Private) Limited, 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 said dispute for adjudication;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-acc- •tion (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 Industrial Tri- ibunal, Calcutta, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.
SCHEDULE
Whether the management of the Khariachina Clay Mines of Patelnagar Minerals and Industries (Private) Limited, Post Office Patelnagar District Birbhum was justified in dismissing Shri Ganesh Mukherjee working in Machine Section and also in General Section on surface from his service with effect from the lGth June, 1967? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled
[No. 24/28/67-LRI.]
New Delhi, the 5th December 1967
S.O- 44*7-—Whereas the industrial disputes specified in the Schedule hereto annexed arc spending before the National Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta constituted by the notification of the •Government of India in the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Rehabilitation No. S.O. 4028, dated the 3rd November, 1967;
And whereas a large number of casts arc pending with the said Tribunal ;
Ani, whereas for the ends of juitic: th- disputes should be disposed of without delay;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 33-Bj and section 7-B, of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby withdraws the proceedings in relation to the said disputes from the National Industrial Tribunal. Calcutta with Shri S. K. Sen as the Presiding Officer, constitutes a National Industrial Tribunal , at Dhanbad of which Shri Kamla Sahai, shall be the Presiding Officer, and transfers the said disputes to it and directs that the Tribunal shall proceed with the said proceedings from the stage JSX which they arc transferred and dispose to the same according to law.
SCHEUULI!
Parties to the dispute
No. of reference
Date of reference .Serial No.
2
1
3
4
1 M/s, Benn-t Colcman and Co. Ltd., Bombay and their work- men represented by (1) The Times of India and Allied Publications Employees Union, Bombay and (2) Bcnnet Coleman ani Co. Employees Union, New Delhi
S.O. 2343
T4-7-I9S7
M/s. Associated Cement Companies Ltd., Bombay and their workmen represented by (1) Indian National Cement Workers' Federation, Bombay and (2) All India Cement Workers' Federation, Bombay-2 . . . ..
iy-10-1966
s.o. 3243
.3 M/s. Amalgamated Electricity Company, Bombay and their workmen represented by (1) Amalgamated Electricity Co. Mazdoor Sangh., Ajmer, (2) Belgaum Workers' Union Belgaum (3) National Electricity and Engineering Workers' Union, Bhiwandi (4) Julgaon Jilla Vij Kamgar Sangh, Bhu- sawal (3) Jalgaon Jilla Vij Kamgar Sangh, Chalisgaon (6) General Workers' Union, Malegaon (7) Rashtriya Vidyut Kamgar Sangh, Malegaon (8) Jalgaon Jilla Vij Kamgar Sangh, Jalgaon . . . . . . S.O. 648 17-2- r o'' 7
Sec, 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 2B, 1889 4657I
4
3
4 M/s. Amalgamated Electricity Company, Bombay and their workmen represented by (1) Amalgamated Electricity Co. Mazdoor Sangh, Ajmer, (2) Belgaum Workers' Union Belgaum (3) National Electricity and Engineering Wor- kers' Union, BhiwanJi (4) Jalgaon Jilla Vij Kamgar Sangh, Hhusawal (5) Jalgaon Jilla Vij Kamgar Sangh, Chalisgaon (6) General Workers' Union, Malegaon (7) Rashtriya Vidyut Kamgar San;h, Malcgaon (S) Jalgaon Jilla Vij Kamgar Sangh, Jalgaon
16-6-1967
S.O. 2112
17-8-1967 The Indian Airlinjs Corporation New D;lhi, an 1 its pilots . S.O.2929
5
27-7-1967 6 T h. Indian Oil Cirpjration, Bombay and thsir workman S.O. 2639
[No. 17/4/67-LRIII.]
S.O. 4428.—Whereas an Industrial dispute specified in the Schedule hereto annexed (hereinafter referred to aa the said dispute) is pending before Shxi Kundan Lnl Gosiiin, Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, with headquarters at Chandigarh;
And, whereas for the ends of justice and convenience of the parties, the said dispute .should be disposed of without further delay;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 7A and sub-sec- tion (1) ol section 33B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby constitutes an Industrial Tribunal, with Shri I. D. Pawar, as the Presiding Officer, with headquarters at Chandigarh and withdraws the proceed- ings in relation to the said dispute from Shri Kundan Lai Gosain and transfers the same to Shri I. D. Pawar, Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Chandigarh for the disposal of the said proceedings with the direction that the said Tribunal shall proceed with the said proceedings from the beginning and dispose of the same according to law-
SCHEDULE
S.O. No. \o[ Gazette Parries to Ihc ] dispute
Reference No. and date to
Industrial Tribunal
Year of Publication
1. Dalmia Dadri Cement
2444dat:dthe 6th July, 19 5 t.
22/7/64-LRII dated the
6th July, iy6f
Limited, Charkhi Dadri, Punjab and their workmen
[No. F. 30,'1/67-LR-I.]
New Delhi, the 8th December 1967
S.O. 44*9—Whereas th" C:n:ral Govern n^nt is of opinion ihit an industrial .dispute exis * between th" employers in relation to the managem;nt of M;ssrs Orissa Mining and EngimerinK Company, Contractor in Thakurani Iron ore Mia: of Messrs Minerals Development Company Limited, Post Offi;; Birbil, District Ktonjhar (Orissa) and their workman jn respect of the matters spiciflii in th; Sch-dul; hjrsto am:x;d;
And, Whjreis th^ CMi'.ral JGiv.:tn nine c.m;id^rs it desirable to rcf;r the said dispute for adjudication ;
N iW) therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by claus; (d) of sub-section (i) of section 10 of the Inlustrial Disputes Act, 194.7 C^4 °f 1947), ths Central Government hereby refers the slid dispute for adjudication to th; Inimtrial Tnbunil, Dhin'sai, conuituted under section 7A of the said Act.
4658 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 23, 1889 [PART I I-SCHEDULB 1. Whether the- demand of the workmen of Messrs OrisBu Mining and Engineering Company,
Contractors of Thakurani Iron Ore Mines of Messrs Orissa Minerals Development Com- pany Limited, Post Office Barbi], District Keonjhar (Orissa) for implementation of the recom- mendationB of the Wage Board for Iron Ore Industry is justified ? If so, to what relief are they entitled.
2. Whether the management of Orissa Mining & Engineering Company, Contractors of Thakurani Iron "re Mines of Messrs Orissa Minerals Development Company, Limited, Post Office Bflrbil, District Keonjhar (Orissa) is justified in retrenching the following 636 workmen with effect from the respective dates mentioned against them ? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?
Designation
Name of workmen
Date of retrench- ment SI. No.
1
2
3
4
1.
Miner & Loader
7-11-T9S7-
2.
31
,,
31
3 J
J,
1,
33
J ,
3>
J,
5 3
,,
J,
13
3- 4- 5- 6. 7- 8. 9-
1 0.
1,
,3
1 1.
31
J,
,,
1 2.
,>
J,
,>
))
.,
,J
13. 14. 15^ 16.
,,
J3
,,
3>
J,
! ?• 18. 19- 2 0.
i>
,,
?,
,^ 2 1. 3 2.
,J
3>
J1
,,
3,
,,
3,
1>
35
31
yt
3,
>r
31
,, 2 3. 24. 25- 26 27 28 29 30
13
,3
13
,,
S h r i B u d h ai S h ri U a j r a n gi S m t. S u r aj H a r i j an . . . . .. S m t. S a l mi S h ri K h a r p a tu R a j b h ar S h vi B a h a d ur R a j b h ar S h ri C h a n d r a J ip Y a d av S h ri M i s h ri H a r j in . . . . .. S h ri B a h a d ur H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri B i j li H a r i j an S h ri G h u r a hu H a r i j an S h ri G h u ra H a r i j in S h ri S a n tu H a r i j an S h ri K i s h o re R a j b h ar S h ri F a w d ar H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri B h i r gu H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri B i n d h a c h al D u s ad . . . . .. S h ri H a r i k i s h un K f l i ri . . . . .. S h ri B a r a r a s hi R a j b h ar . . . . . . S h ri N a n ak R a j b h ar y , S h ri L a b e du R a j b h ar * S h ri H i r a l al R a j b h ar • S h ri R a m b a d an R a j b h ar S h ri S i t a r am H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri S i l o c h an H a r i j an S h ri R a m a d h ar T e li S h ri S i t a r am H a r i j an . . . .. S h ri B a l c h a nJ H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri S u d a ma H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri R a m b a c h an H a r i j an . . . .. S h ri B i s u n J eo H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri S i t a r am Y a d av * S h ri L a l c h a nd H a r i j an
33
11-
,J
. S h ri S a m a lu H a r i j an % . . S h ri R a m b r i ch H a r i ) an . . . . .. . S h ri L a k hu H a r i j an
3>
31 S h ri R a m s a n a hi H a r i j an
3,
. S h ri S u n d a r l al
" S h ri M a n i r am . . . . . .. S h ri R a m s a r up
it
,*
j>
ij
ia
3t
it
,,
„ 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4i 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5°
a
31
it . S h ri R a n c h a r an . . . . . .. . S h ri D h an S ay . S h ri S h y a m l al . . . . . .. . S h ri B u d h an . S h ri S a h m k h an . S h ri S a r ju H a r i j an . . . . .. . S h ri S u n ai . Shri Gopal Laguri . Smt. Sukmati Munda . Shri Ramsakal Rajbhar . . . .. . Sh-i Musafir Rajbhar . Shri Nibu Rajbhar . . . . Shri Kharpat Rajbhar . Shri Bahadur Orang
51 52 53 54
SBC. S(il)] T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1M7/AORAHAYANA 2", 1889 4 6 59I
2
3
4
7-11-1967.
Miner & Loader
>3
)>
J1
•)?
ji
3*
H
55. 56. 57- 58. 59. 60. 6 1. 62.
?1
7J
5 J
*>
5 j
?*
5?
y?
63- 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70.
3)
?•"
3>
??
71- 72.
15
73- 74.
31
}"
iJ
iJ
-J 75- 76. 77- 78.
it
J3
^,
." > 79. 80. 8 1. R2.
3}
83. 84. 85. 86.
33 S h ri R am O r a ng S h ri B a l d co O r a ng S h ri C h a ma O r a ng S h ri B i s i i a g u r am . . . . . .. S m t. S a n a i b ai S ri R a m p r o s ad . . . . . .. S h ii J e i h u r jm S m t. R a m m . i t in S m t. S a b i t ri S h ri S a n i r am S m t. L a x mi . . . . . .. S h ri G h a no L o h ar S m t. B u t ki Shri Tularam S h ri S a d h u r am S h ri S i t a r am . . . . . .. S m t. N a n da M a j hi S h ri M a t hu S a n d il S m t. R e m tu S m t, B e n a d it S h ri J a h ai S h ri K a i ra M u n dg S m t. N a n di S h ri C h a r an M u n da S m t, G h a s i n b ai . . . . . .. S h ri R a m p c y a rc . . . . . .. S h ri R a m d as . . . . . .. S h ri S a k h i r am S m t. B u d h a r a b ai S h ri G o v i n d r am S m t. S a l mi Shri Harman Munda Shri Tejman Harijan
Shri Kesil S h ri K h e d u r am H a r i j an . . . ..
87. 88. 89. 90. 9 i- 92.
it 93- 94- 95- 96.
Smt. Sambari Shri Bodha Lohar Smt. Tifcili Shri LalThentari Smt, Sufchmeti Shri Lakhan Munda S h r i m a ti S a m b a ri . . . . .. S h ri K a n d ey M u n da
31
3S
?*
„,„
3? 97- 98. 99- 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106.
ij
ii
• .
107. IOR. 109.
J? Smt. Jhingi Smt. Turi Munda Shri Ramnath Harijan Shri Rupa Shri Dcsai . . . . . . .. Smt. Mohanmoti Shri Ramfiopal Smt. Makhanbai Shri Sapuram Das . . . . .. Smt. Rahaa Moti Shri Gtmi?shram Smt. Salmi . . . . . . .. Shri Pcrman . . - . . „ .. Shri Patrash . . . . . .. Slu-i Sorru-E Trifci Smt. N;mbai
)i*
Smt. Muffdcli . . . . . .. Smt. Kahil M u n da Shri ThamKS M u n da Smt. Marsha M u n da . . . . .. Shri Pin'lush M u n da . Shri IJJU1LIS1I M u n da
n o. i n. 112. 113. 114 115 116 117 I IS 119
4660 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1907/AGRAHAYANA 25. 1880 [PAST H-I
2
3
4
7-TT-T967
Miner & Loader
H
1)
33
JJ
a
Z3
a
)>
11
33
})
it
9'II-I967
f>
ss
ii
j 1
st
>\
31
M
3t
3 j
33
^
33
33
*3
11
n
33
-*3
JJ
33
53
33
33
33
3 1
is
*J
33
3S
"
13
it
"
31
31
33
33
J3
33
11
31
,,
13
*J
11
33
11
>3
S3
31
3S
3j
33
11
31
33
as
is
st
33
3.
11
3t
33
11
11
"
33
"
120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135- 136. 137. 138. 139- 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. i53i 154 155- 156. IS7- 158. 159 160 161 162 tf.'X 164 165 166 167 168. 169. 170 171. 172.
mazdoor (Time -rated) „
31
173 174
13
3J
U
Jl
u u
5J
H
3}
U
11
3?
3^
M
"
176 *77 178 179 1 80 181 182 183
Smt. Ramkaur Satnami . . . .. Shri Mori ram Satnami Shri Sudharam Satnami Smt. Rukmcnj Satnami Shri Sitaram Satnami Shri Dilacy Satnami Smt. Purnimabai Shri PandiTrnm Satnami Shri Abdul Main Smt. Eteara Shri Chawnn Garha Shri Pilaram Satnami Smt. Safribai Shri Sevanath Satnami Shri Sriram Saw . . . . .. Smt. Sykuare . . . . . .. Shri Jagarnath Saw Shri Bha ftta 8(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA i DEC. IB, W67/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 46;>I
I
3
a
4
Mazdoor (Time-rated) 9-11-1957
JJ
Jj
3J
5J
jj
"
3J
)j
3S
ji
3>
55
JJ
3J
3i
J J
. . . .
yp
JJ
12-11-196;
Miner & Loader
3J
,,
J>
JJ
JJ
rj
>j
3}
JJ
?j
jj
i)
it
jj
JJ
"
JJ
ji
"
JJ
Ji
JJ
JJ
J3
]J
"r u n
3i
JJ
33
Si
3*
J>
*1
V
J"
S3
$ 1
V
JJ
U
Jl
i3
;)
fl
?-
tt
>j
u
i"
JJ
1
J*
3
;j
i^
3S
V
S3
li
9S
Ti
A>
3i
11
JJ
H
- "•
SS
184, 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192. 193. 194. 195- 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 2OI. 202. 203. 304- 205. 206. 207. 208. 209, 210. 311. 212. 213. 214. 215- 216. 217- 218. 219. 220. 221. 222. 223. 334. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 333- 234- 235- 236. 237- 238. 239. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244. 245. 246. 247- 248.
S o nu . . . . . . .. D i b ra S a n u r am . . . . . . .. L o c h a n II . . . . . . .. S a n . ' an , . . . . . ,. H a ri B a r ik C h a m p ai . . . . . . .. C h i n tu . . . . . . .. R a j an . . . . . . .. L o c h an I , . . . . .. H u ne . . . . . . .. P i t a m b ar . . . . . .. S u r en . . . . , . , ., P a d a na . . . . . . .. Siropani M i lu T r i l o c h an . . . . . . .. D a mu . . . . . . .. S h ri N i r m al S oy . . . . .. S r a t. B a h a l i na S oy . . . . .. S h ri C h o u i hi H a r i j an S m t. L a x mi . . . . . .. S h ri B an M u n da . . . . .. S m t. C h a n du M u n da . . . . .. S h ri G h a no M u n da . . . . .. S m t, B a s m o ti M u n da Shri Jogna Munda S m t. C h a mi M u n da S h ri D u ka M u n da S m t. M c n jo M u n da . . . . .. S h ri S u p ai G a n d i al S m t. L c m bc G a n d i al S m t. M a n g ri . . . . . .. S h ri S o n a r am L o h ar . . . . .. S m t. D a s ma L o h ar S h ri K a n hu M u n da S m t. R ai M u n da S h ri J a n a k r am . . . . . .. S h ri T h a n d u r am S m t. G a n e s h i b ai . . . . .. S h ri G h a s ia S a t n a mi Smt. Ramayan Mod Shri Mohotar Satnami Shri Kararasingh Satnami ShriGhasidas Smt. Radhabai Shri Behiram Shri Tengu Shri Ludna Harijan Shri Mukhi Harijan Shri Lalmohaa Harijan Smt. Namshi Shri Ambulam Smt. Kuwari . . . . . .. Shri Surcndra Naik Shri Muritram Smt. Kutoli Shri Anandram Shri Ramkuwar ShxiTenshu Smt. Fulbai Shri Rameswar Shri Sakharam Smt. Santy Shri Bodha Singh
4662 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA t DfiC. 16, 1967/AGEAHAYANA 25, 1839 [PART U-J
3
4
a
V t i n c r& L o a d er
/
I2-I T-IQ6"/• * - •" J- JL f- y*->
tf
if
,,1
3)
31
it
Jj
}j
S h ri G a n e s h r am . . . . .. S m t. M u n g m a ti . . . . .. S h ri J a g d i a h r am S a t n a mi . . . .. S h ri C h a n d r sm S a t n a mi . . . .. S m t, R a m b ai . . . . . .. S h ri R a t an M u n da . . . . .. S m t. S u b ni * . . . . .. S h ri R a m p r o a ad S m t. Y a m u na . . . . . .. Shri Gangaram Smt. Jane Shri Side S m t. S u r ec . . . . . .. S h ri B h a n jo . . . . . .. S m t. L e t he S h ri J e t h u r am . . . . . .. S m t. J a m u na . . . . . .. S h ri S u r en Ho S h r i D a w l al S h ri A j m ul M i r d ha Smt. Nimaian Bibi Shri Bhagram Kurmi S h ri R a m s a g ar S a t n a mi . . . .. Shri Chakuf Satnaml S h ri M a n i r am S a t n a mi S m t. B a h a m u ni D h an S h ri S e m a ru K c ot . . . . .. i m t. R a d h a b ai K t Ot S h ri R e m j cc T e l li S m t. K a l a b ai T e l li S h ri R i , n g i l ul S a t n a mi S m t. F u l b ai . . . . . .. S h ri C h e ru K c ot
249- 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255- 256. 357. 258. 259. 260, 261. 362. 263. 264. 265. 266. 267. 268. a£9. 270. 271. 372. 273. 274- 27<;- 276. 277- 278 279 2 80 2 81 2 82 283 284 285 2 86 287 288 28s 29c 291 2 9: 2 9; 29^ 20
?
29 29 29 29 30 10 30 aO
3°
, S m t. G a n t i r in . . . . . .. . S hn D a y a r am K e ot , S m i. N a d k i b ai . . . . . .. , S h ri P r e m d us P a n ka . . . . .. . S h ri M a n g ra P a n ka . . . . .. . S m t, J u n ai M u n da . . . . .. . S m t. K u w a ri P u r ty . . . . .. . S h ri K a n hu S oy . S m t. S u h ni S oy . . . . . .. . S h ri F a w da N ag . . . . . .. . S m t. G u r b a ri N ag . S h ri S a d h u c h a r an N ag ,. S m t. T un S a r d ar ;. S h ri N a n dc M u n da . . . . .. S. S h ri S u n i ya M u n da . . . . .. 7. S m t. J a b a ni M u n da . . . . .. 3. S h ri G o b i n dc M a j hi . . . . .. 9. S m i. S u b i t ri M o j hi D. S h ri S ; i nu M u n da 1. S m t. R t i i m o ni M u n da 2. S h ii A l i r t i u el D a h u | £.i T i r ia 9. S m t. J a m bi T i r ia 0. S m t. N u n i ka K a n i ee 1. S h ri L.obeya Sirka 2. S hr Goj-al Solanki 3. S m i. M a ni Solanki . . . .. 4. S m t. S u k h m a ti S a n d il
9BC. 3(ii>] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC, 10, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 2S. 1889 4663
I a 3 4
315. S m t, K u j ri lJi r ia . . . • • •" Miner & Loader 12-11-19G7
316. S h ri B u d h r am M a h a k ud . . . .. ,,
S h ri P a n du S i n ku 33 -1
317-
318. S m t. R a i b a ri S i n ku . • " • 33
319. S h ri K a lu P u r ti . . . . . .. JJ
330. S m t. N a n i ka P u ny Jl
321. S m t. C h u n da S a U i a mi . . . . ..
322. S ' n ri R a me M u n da . . . . .. "
S m r. S a m b a ri A l u n da . . . . •• 31
.323.
324. S ' . ri G o h e r d h an S a t n a mi . . . .. . '1
325. Si'.ri D i l ka A n g a ri . . . . .. 31
326. S i m. B u d h ni H c m r am . . . . .. 31
327. S h r; S i r ka C h a t a m ba . . . . ..
32S. S m r. J u n ki , . . . • • ••
329. S h i 'i ' T h a o ij S u v ui . . - . •• 33
330. S m l. S u p a ri S u r ai . . . . -•
J3i- S h ri L a d u ra S a n d il . . . . -•
333. S i n , .. R a i b a ri S a n d il . . . . -•
333- S m i. j u k h m a rc P u r ty . . • • ••
33-1- S h ri A b r a h am . . - • • ••
335- S i t u. S a l mi . . . • - ••
1 *
33fi. S h ri S a n i L T cl T I a rc . . • • •• 13
337. S h ri \ t a s h i d as G u r ia . . - • ••
338. S h i -i S e ma T r i ki
S m t. G n n gi T i r ki , , . • • .- -*1
339-
.340. S h ri H a ri G o pc . . . - • ••
tj
341. S m t. S u k u m a re G o pe . . . - ••
3'
342. S h ri B a s hu B h a n g ra . . - • ••
343- S m t. R a h il B h a n g ra
344- S h ri K a n d cy L a g u ri
si
345. S m t. S u k h m o ti L a g u ri , . • • ••
it
346. S h ri N a n ku S a t n a mi . . • • ••
^
347. S h ri P u r na M a h a k ud . . . • ••
;>
348- S h ri K a n hu B h u d ra
349' E l i a sh H o re . . . . • • ••
5?
35°- G u r a n am L a g u ri . . • • * ••
35
351 C h i k ur H a r i j an . . . - • ••
*H
352. S h ri K a n d cy L o h ar
353 S m t. S a n ty L o h ar
3i
354 S m t, N a n di S u r en . • • • ••
J->
355 S h ri R a s h i ka S u r en . . • • ••
J3
3 56 S m t. S u n i ka C h a r i la . . - • ••
J>
357 S m t. P a r b a ty C h a r i la . . • - ••
J3
358 S h ri C h a k rc C h a t a m ba . . • - •
359 Smt. Junai Hemram J .t
3 bo S h ri A j o d h ya R a j b h ar ,
3*
3&i S h ri S e m a ri T a i se , . . • ••
362 S m t. S e m a ri S u r en . . - • •*
3 •>
3^3 S h ri U l i o lu S a t n a mi . . • • ••
3
368 , S m t. P r e m b ai . . • • • '•
^•^
369 . S h ri B h a r a t r am , . . - ••
370 . S m t. R a h a s h m m o ti . . • • ••
. S h ri M o h a r am . - • • • •' "
371
372 , S m t. S a n k a r m o ti . . . - ••
373 . S h ri B i p i n b i h a ri T a n ti .
374 . S h ri M o ti K o i ri
372 . S h ri B h o la H a r i j an
37* . S h ri M o h ar H a r i j an
37" '. S h ri S i o g o b i nd H a r i j an .
37t . S h ri J a n gi H a r i j an
>. S h ri S a n i d i a r wa
). S h ri P u n a r am K e ot . *
H(
4664 T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. lfl, 1W7/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-
I
3
4
Miner &[Loader'i T2-11-1967
JJ
JJ
JJ
.J J-
JJ
j *1
I.. ' "
j5
J3
3J
ft
J3
ij-
j j
J5
381. 382. 383- 384. 385. 386. 387. 388. 389. 390. 391- 392. 393- 394- 395- 396. 397. 398. 399- 400. 401. 402. 403. 404.
yj
3>
33
3?
.T
ia
Jj
3 3-
JJ
St
5>
33
J>
•J
j*
J3
JJ
3J
Jj
>J
JJ
JJ-
i!
39
J>
3T
;s
3T
j J>
Si
it
JI
j}
JJ
J J'
JJ
JJ
3^
JJ
33
Ji S m t. T i h a r in S h ri N a r c ih H a r i j an S h ri F u l c h a nd H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri S u d a ma H a r i j an S h ri B a h a d ur H a i l j en S m t. P u n i m o ti S m t. R a m b ai S h ri S i w b a r an H a r i j an S h ri Rajbali H a r i j an S h ri R a m s uk H a r i j an . . . . .. Shri R a m c s w ar H a r i j an . . . .. S h ri A n tu Y a d av S h ri Bijaisankar Y a d av Shri Sriram Bhor Shri Panchu Harijan Shri Rambharat Harijan Shri Badam Harijanl Shri Sudama Harijan . . . jtft . ^: . Shri Ramprith Harijan . . . 11" - ? • S h ri R a m d c e > H a r i j an S h ri B u d hu H a r i j an S h ri R a j b a li R a j b h ar S h ri R a i n w a t er R a j b h ar S h ri S a r ju H a r i j an S h ri C h a n d ra G o ur . . . . .. S h ri P u n i y a b e h e ra S h ri F u t k w ar . . . . . .. S h ri N a r s i ng N a ik S h ri T i l e s h w ar R a w a ry J a g m o h an H a r i j an S m t. K a u s a l ya . . . . . •• S h ri K a i l a sh K o i ri . . . . .. S h ri M u n c s h w ar H a r i j an . . . .. S h ri C h u i hi I l a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri B h i r gu H a r i j an . . . . .. S h ri B h u i y an B a h e ra . . . . .. S h ri D u k h a r am R am . . . . .. S h ri R a y a n m a s hi A i nd S h ri S o m ra O r a n g. S h ri T h c b lc O r a ng S h ri C h a m ra H a r i ) an S h ri B i g an H a r i j an S h ri L a h u ru H a r i j an S m t. D e b ki S h ri S u b t ai G a n d ia . . . . .. S m t. S a b in S h ri P a t r a sh T a p nc S m t. S u b ni . . . . . .. S h ri G o p al S a r d ar S m t, G u l a m o n i, . . . . . ..
4°5- 406. 407. 408. 409. 410. 411. 412. 4*3- 414- 415. 416. 417. 418. 419. 420. 421. 422. 423- 424. 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430-
Office Assistant—C
)>
411
i j- Shri S.N. Sojant.i Shri Hrushikesh Naik
Office Boy {weekly)
Shri Murulidhar Mohaiite
433
tec. S(ii)] T HE GAZETTE OF I N D I A: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4 6 65I
2
3
4
Watchman (weekly)
Shri Dhilbahadur Miner & Loader
434-
1-12-67
3i
3?
3?
S3
JJ
3) s
33
it
J3
3t
3J
3)
J5
J j-
3)
Jf
}}
)f
}}
33
J3
M
&>
)}
ft
33
)*
JJ
)3
IT
3>
JJ
3}
33
tt
"
39
3>
}3
j>
j 3
3\f
3}
. . . . . ..
3>
3T
3}
3*
I?
J*
)*
3?
3?
33
J"
33
33
3>
3)
3J
. . . . ..
|f
33
)5
37
JJ
9}
)3
* JJ
3J
33
?3 Shri Sarath Mahato Radhamoni Sumi . . . . . . .. Lakhan Sambari Mashi Hana Kandia Radhi Matta Chandi Rasui Baburam MIcho Madhu Turi Sursingh Nandi Bharath Shankari Khurchand D o o r b ar . . . . . . .. L a l s i n gh K u m e s h ar . . . . . . .. C h a r i ba . . . . . - .• Jcma Janu B h u d h a ni . . . . . . .. J a i r am . . . . . • •• N a r a y an T i r s hi G h i r a n gu P a ni '. R a m y a h ai . . . . - • -• A k l u r am W i l l i am T o p no P a n l i T o p no B J r s ha T a p no . . . . . .. S a n l a ro M a n ia M u n da . . . . . .. Jatri Munda Dibru Munda M a li M u n da M u k h o p a t ra D i m bu M u n da . . . . . .. G u r a b a ri M u n da D u r ga M u n da S m t. T a n ti K u s h nu M u n da M a n t ri M u n da . . . . . .. B h i k h a ri ' I ' a u ti . . . . . .. R u d ra T a n ci L a k h an P a t ra R a d h i ka P a t ra S a m b a ri M u n da . . . . . .. S u r ri M u n da . . . . . .. J a m bi Ho . . . . . - •• A s h r it G u r i a. . . . . - •- M a n g ru M a h a k ud G u r u b ar . . . . . . -• C h i ua H a r i j an . . . . . ..
435- 43<5- 437- 438. 439- 44°- 441- 442- 443- 444- 445- 446. 447- 448. 449- 450. 451. 452. 453- 454- 455- 456. 457- 458- 459- 460. 461. 462. 463- 464. 465. 466. 467. 468. 4"9- 470. 471. 472. 473- 474- 475. 476. 477- 478. 479- 480. 481. 482. 483. 484. 485. 486. 487. 488. 489. 490. 49*. 492. 493- 494. 495-
4 6 66 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 19677AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PACT tt-I
3
4
M i n" & Leader
1-12-67
496.
497.
498. 3)
499- 33
500. i?
501. 3J
it 33
502.
5°3- 3) ii
}J 31
504.
505. ij 33
506. 31 3J
3J 53
5°7-
508. 3S )J
3J )i
509.
510. ]J
311. fl 3*
512. " 33
513. 3*
514. S3
515- 33 9)
516. JJ 13
517- J3 33
518. ii J3
5i9. 33 33
520- >i 33
521. 33 ?J
522. )3 3J
523. 31 J3
524. 33 33
525- 31 33
526. 33 Ji
<27.Jm' 1 * 33 ))
•S2S.
33
3"
33
33
3J
33
13
33
13
33
J>
13
"
M
31
33
33
"
2-12*67
JJ
33
13
JJ
33
JJ>
a a
33
33
"
33
13 .
J3
33
?J
33
JJ
"
3J
H
3J
Jl
33
JJ
33
J>
}i
3J
J>
)1
13
33
JJ
33
}>
JJ Prabhudjayal A i nd Pairoo Harijan . . . . . .. L a n ka M u n da . . . . .. J u n ai M u n da A l i b a s h K h an M a a a t a r am J o d h b ai M e g h n a dh B h u ya R i j hu Bhunja Sayar M u n da S um M u n da R a h m a l u l la . . . . . . .. Sudansingh Pingna Balaama Raya Munda Sukurmoni . . . . . . .. Uhadhram Ho Budhani Baahu Munda Barnabaih Munda Barnabash Bhangna Shibastani Rahil Markush Danguar Sukha Munda Kairi Manda Soma Lohar Purgun . Radio Patra Ratnall lliaah Sud arshan Alunda . . . . .. D u gi Munda Somra M u n da Nerika Munda Sapani Sardar Chandradeo Rajbhar Sanu M u n da Suru Durpati Sukhram Munda Sunai Pani Ram Surgh Sukhlal lena Gono Sukhdeo Ambika Ayavla Baaunti Ismail Silbuia Sambhu K a ma Herman Shanti Dayal Marlain . . . . . . .. Souaram Bhanjoo Sambhari Bango Sabui Imman Khan . . . . . ..
33 529. 530. 531. J32- 533- 534- 535. 536. 537- 538. 539. 54°. 541. 542. 543. 544- 535- 546- 547. 548 549 55° 55i 553 553- 554- 555- 556. W7- 558. 559. 560.
SBC. 3(U)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1907/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4667I
2
3
4
2-12-1967
Miner & Loader
Si
3)
33
11
, .1
J3
Ji
1> 5 6 1. K i t u a ra 5 6 2. Mixnajain 5 6 3. S a i m an K h a t o ln 564. D u l al 5 6 5. M a g an . . . . . . .. 5 6 6. B a l a ma . . . . .. 5 6 7. GoJai
u
JJi 568. Mangu 569. Bahaduia 5 7 0. S o n la . .. . . .. 5 7 1. flhuaha 5 7 2. S a m an 5 7 3. S u h a n n a ni . . . . .. 574. P a r b a ti
575. Lalliu 5 7 6. N o u r u, . . . . . . ..
J3
^,
,,
,,
it
33
33
JJ
3J
577, Kilnjmat 578. Davaram 579. Ganeshmati 580, Ghurahu 581. Kiritmali 582. Pradhan 583. Bhanja 584. Udai 585. Iabani 586. Samual
3,
33
587. Fulman 588. Prabhu Sai
33
>J
m
589. Hliseva 590. Jalpari 591. Ettas
592. Selai 593. Sudana 594. Sita 595. Baraabash
596. Etuari 597. Cbandu 598. Jena 599. tagannath
3> 6 0 0. P u r a in 6 0 1. C h m ru . . . . . . .. 6 0 2. G a n ga 6 0 3. F u l e s h a r am . . . . . . .. 6 0 4. T i h a r in 6 0 5. A n g od 606. T i k la 6 0 7. S a n a t an 608. M a li 609. S o m ra . . . . . . .. 6 1 0. B u d a nl . . . . . . .. 6 1 1. L ai Bihari . . . . . . ..
it
it
3 J
}"
}>
31
)5
Si 6 1 2. C h a k ra 6 1 3. S h a n ti 6 1 4. D e b ra 6 1 5. C h a m b a ri 616. Elias 6 1 7. M o t i l al 6 1 8. M a d hu 619. S a m b an 6 2 0. S u b rl 6 2 1. S a m b an . . . . . . ..
1
ij
>i
Jl
>r
>i 6 2 2. K a i l oo 6 2 3. G o p al 6 2 4. C h a n du 6 2 5. S u k a r m a ni 626. SushUa 6 2 7. P a t r as 6 2 8. M a r a im
4668 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-I
2
3
4
M i n er a nd L o a d er 2-12-1967 629. 630. 631. 6 3 2. 6 3 3. 6 3 4. 6 3 5.
A t u a r am . . . . . . .. S u d h ut S u a h i la . . . . . . .. S u n ia . . . . . . .. R a i b a ri . . . . . . .. A r j un . . . . . . .. L a x a mi . .. T u ri
^12-1967
[No. F. 24I34/67-LRI]
S. S. SAHASRANAMAN, Under Secy.
(Department of Labour and Employment)
New Delhi, the 24th November 1967
S.O. 4430.—In pursuance of Sub-section (1) of Section 14, Sub-Beet Jon (1) of Section 15, Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Personal Injuries (Compensation Insur- ance) Act, 1963 (37 of 1963), the Central Government hereby authorises the Cbiei Inspector of Factories, Himachal Pradesh appointed under Section 8(2) of th" Factories Act to exercise the powers under Sections 14, 15, 18, 17 and 18 r>l the said Act throughout the Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh end Labour Inspec- tors, Mandi, Chamba, Nahan, Kasumpati and Simla and Watfe Inspector, Palampur to exercise the powers under Sections 14 and 15 of the said Ad within their respective jurisdiction.
[No- 3/40/8"-Spl.FacII.J
N- N. CHATTERJEE, Jt Secy.
(Department of Labour and Employment)
New Delhi, the 24th November 1967
S.O. 4431.—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, Dhanbad, In the matter of an application under Section 33A of the said Act from Shri Tej Bahadur, Watchman, Ticket No. 3426, Watch and Ward Department. Jamadoba, C/o. Shri B, N. Sharma, President, Congress Maz- door Sangh, Bihar, Jorapokhar, Post Office Jealgora, District Dhanbad, which was received by the Central Government on the 21st November, 1967.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT AT DHANBAD.
In the matter of a complaint under section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
COMPLAINT NO. 19 OF 1966
(Arising out of Ref. Nos. 39/64, 63/63; 46/64; 91/64 and 67/63)
PASTIES:
Shri Tej Bahadur, Watchman, T. No. 3425, Watch and Ward Department, Jamadoba. C/o. Shri B. N. Sharma, President, Congress Mazdoor Sangh, Bihar, Jorapokhar, P.O. Jealgora, Dist., Dhanbad.—Com- plainant.
Vs.
M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., Jamadoba. P.O. Jealgora Dist., Dhan- bad.—Opp. Party.
PMSENT:
Shri Kamla Sahal.—Presiding Officer.
SEC. 3(ii)J THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, li)G7/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 46691APPEARANCES:
For the Complainant.—-Shxi B. N, Sharma, President, Congress Mazdoor Sangh.
For the Opposite Party.—Shri S. N, Singh, A.CP. and W.O.
STATE; Bihar.
INDUSTRY: Coal.
Dhanbad, dated the 30th October, lB67/8th Kartika, 1889
AWARD
This complaint under section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been filed by Shri Tej Bahadur, Permanent Watchman, Watch and Ward Depart- ment, Jamadoba, bearing Ticket No. 3425. His case that he is a concerned workman in reference Nos. 39 of 1964; 63 of 1963; 46 of 1964; 31 of 1964 and 67 of 1963 and that, during the pendency of those references he has been dismissed from service by the management of the opposite party with effect from the 3rd. November, 1965.
1. It appears that chargesheet No. 93 of 1965 dated the 27th August, 1965 waff served upon the complainant on the allegation that he committed misconduct under clause 19(6) of the Standing Orders in as much as he "himself raised an alarm on the night of the 24th/25th August, 1965 at about 23:15 hours to the effect that he saw a few men near a tree in the area of the pipe racks carrying one pipe and later reported that those men fled away on hearing his alarm after dropping the pipe. Since he was on duty from 22:00 hours to 7:00 hours on the night of the 24 /25th August, 1965, the chargesheet stated that it should not have been possible for miscreants to enter the central Store yard if his patrolling had been effective. The complainant has been dismissed on that charge and he has challenged the- order of dismissal on various grounds.
3. The opposite party has filed its written statement. Amongst other things, it has stated therein that the award in reference No. 46 of 1964 was published In the Gazette of India dated 13th February, 1965, and it cannot be said to have been pending on the 23rd November, 1965 when the complainant was dismissed or on the 24th and 25th August, 1965 when the complainant was alleged to have com- mitted the misconduct in question. It has further stated that the complainant was not a 'workman concerned' in reference No. 39 of 1964; 63 of 1963; 31 of 1964; and 67 of 1963. On these grounds, the preliminary objection which has been taken is that the present complaint under section 33-A la not legally maintain- able.
4. At the hearing, both parties have adduced oral and documentary evidence but they have confined themselves to the question whether the preliminary objec- tion taken by the opposite party namely that the complainant was not a workman concerned' in the references referred to above is valid. Mr. Sharma, who has appeared for the complainant, did not however, challenge the allegation that reference No. 46 of 1964 was concluded before the incident In question occurred' or the complainant was dismissed,
5. Mr. Sharma has not called for the reference made by the Central Govern- ment in reference No. 31 of 1964 from the file of the Additional Industrial Tribu- nal where it has been transferred. The letters of reference in reference No. 39 of 1964, 63 of 1963 and 67 of 1963 are on the record and the schedules, indicating the nature of the dispute in each of them, have been marked exhibits. Before proceeding to consider the question of law raised in this case, I wish to quote tha schedules: —
(ii Reference No. 39 of 1964—Ext. W 6.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the termination of the services of Shri S. Q. Ahmad, Incharge Watch and Ward Dept. Tata's Collieries, Jamadoba. with effect from the 1st January 1964 by the management was justified? If not, to what relief is he entitled?
4670 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-(ii) Reference No. 63 of 1963—Ext. W 7.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the dismissal of the following workmen by the management of Digwadih Colliery of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., was justified? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?
[o. Name of ihe workmen
Designation SI. IS
Watchmen
I. Shii Shyam Deo Goala
Miner
2. Shri Banwari
Oil Mazdoor Shri Bhutan Singh
3-
Watchman
Shri Hem Bahadur
4-
(iii) Reference No. 67 of 1963—Ext. W 9.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the dismissal of Shri Nathuni Pandey, Watchman, Ticket No. 3250 of 6 and 7 Pita Colliery with effect from the 2nd February, 1963, by the management of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., was justified if not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
6. The words 'the workman concerned' have been used in Section 33(1), The words 'a workman concerned' have been used in sub-section (2) of the same section. The interpretation of the expression used in the two sub-section does not now present much difficulty. The Supreme Court has interpreted them in three important decision. They are: New India Motors, (Private) Ltd., Vs. Morris (K.T.)—1960 (I) L.L.J. 651; Digwadih Colliery Vs. Ramji Singh—1964 (II) L.L.J. 143 and TISCO Ltd., Vs. D. R. Singh—1965 (II) L.L.J. 122. In the New India ..Motors case, their Lordships have observed:
"Therefore, we are not prepared to hold that the expression 'workmen con- cerned in such dispute' can be limited only to such of the workmen who are directly concerned with the dispute in question. In our opi- nion, that expression includes all workmen on whose behalf the dispute has been raised as well as those who would be bound by the award which may be made in the said dispute."
7. In Digwadih Colliery's case, a similar question arose for consideration be- fore the Industrial Tribunal, and, without finding out the nature of the dispute in the pending reference the Tribunal held that the workman in question In the case before it was a workman concerned in the dispute. Their Lordship held that, with- out consideration of nature of the earlier dispute, the tribunal could not come to any conclusion as to whether the workman in question was concerned in that dispute.
8. In TISCO Ltd./s case [1965(11) L.L.J. 122], their Lordship have stated that the law on the subect has been laid down in the cases of New India Motors and Digwadih Colliery.
9. All the above three decisions of the Supreme Court and some other decisions were considered by the Patna High Court in New India Sugar Mills Ltd., Dar- bhanga Vs. Krishna Ballabh Jha and others—1967 (II) L.L.J. 210. Their Lord- ship have laid down:
" there must be some common feature in the nature of the dispute in the two cases which should served as a connecting link thereby ren- dering the workmen in the later case also workmen concerned in the dispute in the earlier case. The mere fact that the same union had taken up the cause of the two wrokmen, or else that by virtue of S. 18(3) (d) of the Act all workmen may be bound by the award in the earlier dispute, may not suffice, unless there is some other com- mon feature in the two disputes as mestioned above.1'
SEC. S(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 467110. The facts of this case have now to be examined. It is quite clear that the dispute in reference Nos. 63 of 1963 and 67 of 1963 were individual disputes. No. evidence has been adduced why the workmen in question in those cases were dis- missed and what can be said to be the common feature in those disputes and the present, one in which the complainant has been dismissed on the allegation that he failed to do his duty of a watchman as he was required to do.
11. Mr Sharrna has given evidence himself and he has attempted to show that the compVmant was concerned in reference No. 39 of 1964 because he was interest- ed in S".Q. Ahmed, the termination of whose service led to the dispute in that case. He has stated that he took up the, cause of S.Q. Ahmed because several worknon filed one application before him on the 20lh December 1963 and anoth-i- ap'Vi.-atiovi on ths 4th January, 1964 i.e., three days after Shri S.Q. Ahmed's service was terminated on the 1st January, 1964. He has argued that all ilie watchmen were interested in the result of that dispute because they wanted the continuance of Shri Ahmed's service. In my opinion, the mere fact that a workman has sympathy for another workman who is involved in a dispute and hopes that he would be free from his difficulties cannot mean that he is a workman concerned in the dispute. The question which has to be examined is whether a principle can be or is likely to be laid down in the previous dispute which principle is likely to be applicable to and of interest to the complainant. It is only then that the workman directly concerned in the previous dispute and the complainant can be said to have a common interest in that dispute, In other words, the complainant, in order that he may be heM to be concerned in a previous dispute should be interested in the principle involved in that dispute and not in the workman in his personal capacity. Mr. Sharma has not been able- to show that any decision in Ahmed's case could have been of any application to the complainant on any basis.
12. Apat form the point which I have mentioned above, the opposite party had adduced evidence to show that it was on the 1st April, 1964—and Shri Ahmed's service was terminated on the 1st January, 1964—that the present complaint was appointed as a watchman for the first time. It has filed his original service record also. It has been suggested to Shri Parvatiyer, MW1 that the complainant was in temporary service for two years before he was made permanent on the 1st April, 1964 but the witness has denied this suggestion. No evidence has been led to show that the suggestion is correct. Neither of the two application, Exts. Wl and W2 filed on behalf of the complainant shows that the complainant was one of the watchman who requested Mr. Sharma to take up Shri S. Q. Ahmed's case. In the circumstances, I hold that the complainant is not a workman who was concerned in reference No. 39 of 1964.
13. As I find that there was no reference pending in which the complainant could bo held to be a workman concerned his complaint under Sec. 3SA is not legally maintainable. It is therefore, rejected. I give my award accordingly. Let it be submitted to the Central Government.
(Sd.) KAMLA SAHAI. Presiding Officer. [No. 2/65/63-LRIL]
New Delhi, ths 25th November 1967
S.O. 4432.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 (14 Of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Additional Industrial Tribunal. Dhanbad, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the New Sinidih Colliery of Messrs Bamand'ha Coal Com- pany Limited, P.O. Kharkharee, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 22nd November, 1P67.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT DH \NB/>T>
In the; matter of a reference under Section 'OdKd) of tV> Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
REFEBEKCT! NO. BP OF 19^7
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the New Sinidih Colliery ni Messis Bainrmdiha Coal.
Company Liraite:!. Post Office Kharkharee. Distt. Dhanb?d
AND
Their Workmen-
.4672 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, I967/ACRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-.PRRSENT :
Shri Nandagiri Venkata Rao, Presiding Officer.
APPEKANCES :
For the Employers: Shri Rabindra Nath Mukherjee, OCtire Manager.
For the Applicant: Shri Shankar Bosc, Secretary, Colliery Mazdoor Sangh.
STATE: Bihar.
INDUSTRY; Coal-
Dhanbad, the Hthjfovember, 1967.
'23rd Kartika', ~1889.
AWARD
The Central Government, being of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the New Sinidih Colliery of Me.ssrs Bamandiha Coal Company Limited, Post Office Kharkharee, District Dhanbad and their work- men, by its order No. 2/121, 6JJ-LRII r'aLed 25th Novembei, 19H5 referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad under Section 10(l)(cD of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication the dispute in respect of the matter specified in the .schedule annexed thereto The schedule is extracted helow:
"SCHEDULE
Whether the management of the New Sinidih Colliery of Messrs Bamandiha Coal Company Limited was justified in dismissing Shri A- N- Mishra, Register Keeper, from its service with efl'ect from the 26th August, 1D65? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
2. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad registered the refer- ence as reference No. 193 of 19(15 on its file- Workmen filed their statement of demands. No statement of demands was filed by the Employers- While it was pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhonbad the proceed- ing was transferred to this Tribunal, by the Central Government by its order ..No. R/25/67-LRII dated 8th May 1967 under Section 33(B1 of the Industrial Disputes -Act, 1947. Consequently, the reference is renumbered on the Me of this Tribunal as reference No. 88 of iH67.
3- The workmen were represented by Shri Shankar Bose, Secretary, Colliery .Mazdoor Sangh and the employers by Shri Rabindra Nath Mukherjee, Office Manager- The parties have filed a compromise memo stating that the affected workman, A. N. Mishra, Register Keeper will be treated as if retrenched from the employment with eHect from the 26th August, 1965, that he will be paid compensa- tion in terms of. Section 25F(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, that the said payment will be made within 30 days from the date of the award and that the parties will bear their respective costs of the proceedings. The compromise memo Is duly verified- The terms of compromise appear to me fair and in the interest of the affected workman. The compromise is, therefore, accepted- The award is made in terms of the compromise and submitted under Section 15 of the Industrial 'Disputes Act, 1947. The compromise memo is annexed hereto and made part of the •award
(Sd.) N- VENKATA RAO,
Presiding Officer- Central Government Additional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad.
BEFORE THE HON'BLE PRESIDING OFFICER
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADJUDICATION INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT DHANBAD CAMP—CALCUTTA
AT- KEF. NO. 88 OF 1967
I.T. REF. NO- in OF ima
IIPARTIES :
Employers in relation to New Sinidih Colliery
AND
Their Workmen represented by Colliery Mazdnor Sangh, Dhanbad.
Compromise Petition of the Parties Concerned
The parties above named most respectfully beg to summit as under:
(1) That the above matter is pending before this Hon'ble Tribunal for adjudication.
SEC. 3(il)1 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4673(2) That the parties, without prejudice to their respective contention, decide to settle this matter in terms mentioned hereunder:
(a) It is agreed that concerned workman Sri A. N, Mishra R o i s t er keeper will he treated as if retrenched from the employment wltn effect from 26th August, 1965-
(b) That the workman will he paid compensation in terms of section 25(F) (b) of the I.D. Act, 1947.
(c) That the said payment will be made within 30 days from the date of the Award-
(d) that the parlies will bear their respective costs of the proceedings.
(3) That the parties abovenamed herein prey that thia Hon'ble Tribunal m ay greciously be pleased to ficcept the terms of settlement as staieu hereinabove and pass an order in terms thereof.
And for this the parties as in fluty hound shall ever prey.
CALCUTTA,
Dated 2-"h October, 1967. For Employers. For Workmen. For Bamandiha Coal Co. Lid's For Colliery Mazrtoor Sangh.
New Sinidih Colliery.
(Sd.) RAJENDRA NATH MuKHiiRjmn,
(Sd.) SHANKAR BOSE.
Office Manager
Secretary- 24/10/07
. 24/10/67 Concerned Workman
(Sd.) ACHUTA NANB MISHKA,
24/10/67
LNo 2, 131/fiS-LR-II.]
New Delhi, the 2nd December 1U67
S.O. 4433.—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, Dhanbad (No. 2), in the industrial dispute between t he employers in relation to the South Bulliaree Kenduadih Colliery of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited, Post Office Jealgora, District Dhantoad and their workmen, which received by the Central Government on the 28th November. 1967.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No 2)
AT DHANBAD.
In the matter of a reference under Section 10(l)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
REFERENCE N O. GO OF 19G7
PARTIES ;
Employers in relation to the South Bulliaree Kenduadih Colliery of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited. P. O- Jealgora, DiiU Dhanbad.
AND
Their workmen.
PRESENT:
Sri Nandagiri Venkata Rao, Presiding OlTIeer-
AWEARANCES:
For the Employers—Sri J. N. P Sahi, Assistant Chief Labour Officer. For the Workmen—Sri Ram Mitia, Secretary, Bihar Koyala Mazdoor Sattha.
STATE : Bihar-
INUTJSTKY : Coal-
Dhanbud, dated the 23rd November 1967
AWARD
The Central Government, being of opinion that an industrial dispute exists bet- ween t he employers in relation to the South Bulliaree Kenduadih Colliery of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited, Post Offie Jealgora, District Dhanbad and their workmen, by its order No. 2/66/65-LRII dated 30th July, 1966 referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad under Section 10(1 Ud) of the
4674 T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-Industrial Disputes 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 action of the management of the South Bulliaree Kenduadih. Colliery of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited in terminating the services of Sri S. M. Abu (E. B. No. 20533). Screening Plant Munshi, 6th Pit, Bulliaree, with effect from the 10th November, 1964 was justi- fied? If not, to what relief is the workmen entitled?"
2. The Centra! Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad registered the refer- ence as reference No. 127 of 1965 on its file. While it was pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad the proceeding was transferred to thi" Tribunal, by the Central Government by its order No. 8/25/67-LRII dated 8th May 1967 under Section 33 (B) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Conse- quent!'--, the reference is renumbered on the file of this Tribunal as reference No- 60 of 1967- The employers as well as workmen filed their statement of demand-.
3 The workmen were represented by Sri Ram Mitra, Secretary, Bihar Koyala Mazdoor Sabha and the employers by Sri J. N. P- Sahi, Assistant Chief Labour Officer Sri S N. Abu (hereinafter referred to as the affected workman) was employed under the employers, colliery as the Screening Plant Munshi. The employers terminated his services with effect from 10th October 1964, alleging that his eye sight was grossly defective. The case of the workman is that the affected workman was sent by the employers to the colliery hospital and then to the. Cent- ral Hospital at Jagjiwannagar for treatment as he was suffering from bad eye sight, that the Medical Officer of the Central Hospital after examination granted to him a fit certificate on 7th July 1964, that inspite of his producing the certificate the employers refused to admit him to duty, that he made verbal requests and petitions to the manager and agent of the employers without any effect, that before the Assistant Labour Commissioner the employers agreed to receive him on duty 11 he produced a fresh fitness certificate from the Central Hopsital, that the affected workman submitted a fresh fitness certificate to the Chief Mining Engineer through a registered post but to no avail and that the job of a Screening Plant Munshi is a surface light job and a slight defect in the eye sight did not come in his way of performing the duties satisfactorily. The stand' taken by the employers is that at the relevant time the affected workman had reached the advanced age of 61 years and was physically very infirm and also had a grossly defective eye sight, that the work of the Screening Plant is very important to the employers business that owing to the disability the affected workman was unfit to perform his duties, that when first examined by the colliery medical officer, he was found to be suffering from high blood pressure and was physically very weak that the management sent him to the Central Hospital at Jagjiwannagar on 4th Jmy, 1964 for a medical check up of his eye sight, that he was discharged from the hospital on 7th July, 1964 with a certificate which did not refer to the condition of his eve sight, that he again brought a certificate from the Central Hospital showing" that his eye sight was grossly defective and that, as such, his services were terminated validly with effect from 10th November, 1964.
4 Or, brhaJf of the workman a witness, WW1 is examined and Exts. Wl to W9 are marked On behalf of the employers also a witness. MW1 is .examined and Exts fr to M3 are marked. The sole question for determination is whether the empio-e-s Ve-> V t i f i ed in terminating the services 01 the affected workman w?th effect from 10>h November 1964 on the ground cf his suffering from bad Tye sight. The burdon wa" lying on the emivoyers to establish that at the rele- vant time th" affected workman had reached the advanced age of 61 years, was physi*™ --"r, infirm and was having ITOE-J defective eve sight rendering Mm fncamb^ of discharging his duties as a Screening Plant Munshi ^ " e n t lv But no sWf-Wify material is brought on record towards this end Ext. Ml is the OTdlf Ve-Jiriti-ig the services of the affected worman, Ext. M2 is an outaoor leireW fee, 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA; DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 4675
the certificate had slated that the vision of the aflected workman was 6/6(1 and 6/24, but it wag dflirult. Cor him to say which eye was 6/60 or 6/24. The witness con- ceded that he maintained a register to show that the affected workman was under his treatment. But no such register is produced. The witness, being a Medical Officer must have examined a number of persons each day and it is not convinc- ing how he was able to give evidence in respect of the affected workman out of his memory after more than 3 years. There is no explanation why the register maintained by him could not have been produced- He has not produced any certificate or outdoor patient ticket said to have been seen by him and ho simply says that he had returned all of them to the ufleeted workman. On his own showing in one outdoor ticket he had seen the observation that the affected workman was fit for surface job. This statement contradicts the stand laken by the employers. In short. I find no material at all to justify the action taken by the employers against the affected workman. The case of the workman is that the affeeir>d workman hod produced his fitness certificates before the management of Ihe employers, and that they have suppressed them. Ext. Wl is a copy of the letter nddresse-l by the affected workman to the manager on 17th July. 1964, complaining that in spite of his producing the fitness certificate from the Medical Officer nf the Central Hospital he was nut allowed to resume dutv. TCxt. W2 is the postal receipt relating to it. Ext- W3, the postal acknowledge- ment pertaining to it shows that it was received bv and on behalf of the employers on ISth July. 1904. Ext. W4 is another office copy of a letter addressed hy the affected workman to the manager rl the employers. Tt is in continuation of the previous letter, Ext. Wl, stating thnt no action was taken on his previous letter and that hr has been kept idle This letter is dated 2nd September, 1964. Ext- W5 and WR are postal receipt and acknowledgement relating to Ext. W4. Ex1- W6 shows that it was received by the manager on 3rd September. 1964. The failure report of fhe Conciliation Officer, Fxt W7 alsu shows that the employers had admitted before him that the affected workman had produced a certificate from the Central Hospit.il stating that his eye sight was defective but he was fit for surface job. From the above the inference is irresistable that the affected work- man had produced certificates of fitness from the Central Hospital but the employers have suppressed them- In view of these admissions and the material on record I find absolutely no -justification on the part of the employers to terminate the services of the affected workman on the ground of his suffering from defective eye sight rendering him incapable of discharging his duties as a Screening Plant Munshi.
5. The employers had taken a preliminary objection thnt the order of the Central Government tran^ferine the reference from the Tribunal Wo. 1 to this Tribunal vas illegal under Section 33(B1d') of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1047 that it was without jurisdiction and that the dispute referred for adjudication was not an industrial dispute. The first two objections were negatived by me on 14th September, 1967. Tn respect of the third objection W l. the Vice Presi- dent of Bihar Koysla Mazdoor Pabha has deposed that during the conciliation proceedings he represented the affected workman before the Conciliation Officer that during the proceedings he had submitted the counterfoil receipt book Ext. W8 and that the receint relating the affected workman is Ext. W8(a)- The receipt Ext. WRfal is dated 6fh September, 1964 and shows that, on that date the affected workman had becnme n member of the Koyala Mazdoor Sabhn of which WW1 was the Vice President. There is absolutely no evidence on behalf of the emplov- ers to rebut it. Thus, I find no substance in the objection thut the dispute referred to this Tribunal for adjudication was not an Industrial Dispute.
P. I, therefore, hold thai the action of the management of the South Bulliaree Kenduadih CoJJjery f'f Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited in terminating the services of the affected workman, S.M. Abu CE. B. No. 205331, Screening Plant Munshi, 6th pit, South "Dulliaree Kenduadih Colliery with effect from 10th November 19R4 WHS not justified, and conseauently, he is entitled to his wages and other emoluments from 10th November 1964 to the date of his re-instalement as though his services were never terminated The award is made accordingly and submitted under Section 15 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1D47.
(Sd/-) N. VENKATA RAO. Presiding Officer.
4676 TWB. GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PAUT I I-APFEMDIX I
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD.
REFERENCE NO. 61 OF 1967
Employers in relation to South Bulliary Kenduadih Colliery of Messrs East
Indian Coal Company Limited, P. O. Jealgora, District Dhanbad.
AND
Their workmen
LIST OF DOCUMENTS ADMITTED IN EVIDENCE FOR THE EMPLOYERS
Remarks Dcscripvon of document & date.
Date of admission.
Distinguishing mirk or num- ber.
Whether admitted aft-r or without objection.
M Wi Ex. Mi
Proved.
14-9-67
Letter of termination of service dt. 10-11-64.
-do-
-do-
Ex. M2
-do-
Outdoor ticket of Central hospital.
-do-
*do-
-do-
Ex. M3
Letter dated 18-6-64 from Sri S. M. Abu with endor- sement of colliery manager and medical officer.
List of Documents Admitted in Evidence for the Workmen
Remarks Description of document & date.
Date of admission.
Whether admitted after or without objection.
Distinguishing mark or num- ber.
Wi
Proved.
i4-9~67
Ex. Wi
-do-
-do-
-do-
Ex. "Wa
-do-
-do-
-do-
EX.W3
-do-
-do-
-do-
'Ex. W4
-do.
-do-
-do-
Ex. W5
-do-
-do-
-do-
Ex. W6
-do-
-do-
-do-
Ex. W?
-do-i
-do-
-do- -do-
-do-
-do- Ex. W8 Ex. W8(S)
-do-
-do-
-do-
Letter dt. 17-7-64 to Colliery Manager from S. M. Abu. Postal receipt No. 30 dt. 17-7-64- Postal acknowledgement cards dt. 18-7-64. Letter of 1st Septr.' 64 to Col- liery Manager from S.M. Abu. Postal receipt dt. 2-9-64 of above letter. Postal acknowledgement cards of above letter. Letter No. D. 144/1 (139065) dated 25-6-65 failure report. Membership receipt book- Membership receipt book Page No. 1377. A chit sign by the Colliery manager dated 8/3.
(S
Presiding Officer.
Central Government Additional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad.
SEC. 5(fi)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : PEC. 16, 1967/AGRAHAVANA 25, 1889 4677APPENDIX II
REFERENCE NO. 60 OF 1967
Employers in relation to South Bulliary Kanduadiii Colliery of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited., P.O. Jealgora, District Dhanbad.
AND
Their workmen
List of Witmss Examined for iht Employrr
No. of-witness
Date of examination
Name of witness
14.9-67
MWi
Dr. Ranjit Kumar Sinha
List of Witness Examined for tfie Workmm
Name of witness
Date of examination
No. of witness
Shri Anant Sharran
14-9-67
w'w'i
(Sd/-) N. VENKATA RAO Presiding Officer. Central Government Additional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad, [No. 2/68/85-LRII-]
New Delhi, the 5th December 1967
S.O. 4434.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1847 (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 Sarpi Kajora Colliery, Post Office Ukhra (Burdwan) and their work- men, which was received by the Central Government on the 29th November, 1967.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA
REFERENCE NO- 46 OF 1967
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the Sarpi Kajora Colliery,
ANB
Their w o r k m en
PRESENT :
Shri S. K, Sen—Presiding Officer.
APMEARANCXfl:
On behalf of Employers—Shri K. p. Mukherjee, Bar-at-Law with Shri J. D. Mookherjee, Shri R. C. Thacker, Agent and Shri I. P. Singh, Labour Officer.
On behalf of Workmen—Shri Kedar Ram, (Concerned w o r k m a n) a nd later Shri S. J. Choudhury.
STATE: West Bengal
INDUSTRY: Coal Mines
AWARD
By Order No, 6/40/67-LRII, dated 2nd J u ne 1067, t he Centre^ Government referred for adjudication an industrial dispute between t he employers in relation to t he Sarpi Kajora Colliery, Post Office U k h ra (Burdwan) a nd their w o r k m en in respect of t he m a t t er specified in t he following schedule:
"Whether t he non-employment of Shri Kedar Ram, Surface T r a m m er with eff"ct from the 3th February, 1967 by tha management of S i r pi Kajora
AfaS THE, GAZET1E Ol' INDIA: DEC. IG, l'.)<>7/A<:,IUltAVANA 2b, ibS'J [V\K[ U-Colliery, Post Ollicc Ukhra (Burdwanj was justified? II not, to what relief is he entitled?"
2. Neither side filed any written statement in spite ol issue of registered notices. From the papers annexed with the failure report it appears thai me case of the Union before the Conciliation Olhcer was Mat the woiKman, Kedar ivam, a surface trammer, had been wrongiully tioppect irom work from 0th February 11>o7 and the domestic'enquiry was held ex'-parie in Ins absence without miormin.fi the workman oi! the date of enquiry. Accordmg LO iho management, the workman absemed him- self without taking leave lor more than 1U days irum Oth lebrueuy 1U67 aud therefore a chargesheet was issued on ZUth August 1967. Copy of the cnargesheet wus sent by registered post to his colliery quarters as well as to the home address at the workman but the same could not be served. Similarly the notice oi enquiry was returned undelivered. Accordingly, ihe management held an ex-par ie enquiry on 16th March 1967 and issued order ol dismissal on 17th March li"67.
3. After waiting for over 4 months for written statements of the parties, notice was issued by registered post tixing 21st .November 1967 as the date ot hearing, (Jn 18th November 19C7 Lhe management appeared along with the workman Kedar Ram and the parties tiled a joint peLition stating that there was no dispuie between Lhe parties respect of the subject-matter of the reference. Kedar Ham was examined on oath and he stated that he did not wani, to return Lo service under the colliery and wanted to look after his cultivation in his home district and that he had no dispute with the company. On 21st November 1H67 Shri S. J. Choudhury appeared ior the union and stated that he had no instruction. The reference is accordingly disposed of an footmfi that there is no dispute now between th" parties over the non-enipJoymenL of Shri Kedar Ram.
Dated, the 21st November, 1907.
(3d.) S. K. St;N,
Presiding Offker. LNo. fl/40/67-LRIL]
ORDERS
New Delhi, the 25th November 1907
SO. 4435.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the South Bulliaree Kenduadih Colliery of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited, Post Office Jealgora, Dis- trict Dhanbad and their workmen in respect of the matteri specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;
And, whereas the Central Government considers it desirable to refer the said dispute for adjudication;
i
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (-d) of sub-sec- tion (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1047 (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 action of the management of South Bulliaree Kenduudih Colliery, Post Office Kusunda, District Dhanbad of Messrs East Indian Coal Company Limited, Post Office Jealgora, District Dhanbad in dis- missing Shri Oaman Mian, Mason Mazdoor from service with eliect from the 5th May, 1967, was justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?
[No. 2/1^2/67-LRlLJ
New Dpllii, the 1st December 19G7
S.O- 4436.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an Industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the Hindustan Lalpeth Colliery Chanda and their workmen in respact of the matters speeifled in the Schedule herwto annexed.
SEC. S(ii)j tnt C.AZEI t'£ ol; INDIA : DEC, lfir JWit/AGliAHAYAMA 25, 1^9 4679 '
And wheieas the Central Government considers it desirable to refer the said dispute for adjudication;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the- powors ronfrrred by clause (d) of wub-scclion (1) of section 10 ot the Industrial Dispute.'.- Art, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby refers the said dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.
SCUKDUI.E
Is the management of Hindustan Lalpeth Colliery lustilied m terminating the services 01 Shri Malkhan Sinfih, Coal-curler, on the strength oi the certificate of unfitness dated the Gth March 1907 of the Civil Sur- geon, ChandaY If not to whut relief is Shri Malkhansingh entitled?
[No. 5/60/67-LRII.] New Delhi, the 2nd December 19G7
S.O. 4437.—Whereas an industrial dispute exists between the Banki Colliery of Messrs National Coal Development Corporation Limited, Post Office Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur; (hereinafter referred to as the said company; and their work- men represented by the 1V1.P. Colliery Workers' Federation (1NTUC), Post Office Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur), (hereinafter referred to as the Union)-
And whereas the said Company and the Union have by a written agreement, in pursuance of the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 10A of the Industrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), referred the said dispute to the arbitration of the person specified therein, and a copy of the said arbitration agreement baa been forwarded to the Central Government;
Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1H47 (14 of 1947;, the Central Government hereby publishes the said arbitration agreement, which was received by it, on the 21st November, U)(-i7-
Agreement (Under Section l'OA of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947;
BETWEEN
Names of the Parties:
Representing Employers.—Shri S. P. Mathur, Deputy Superintendent of Colli- eries, Banki Colliery of M/s- N.C.D.C Ltd., P.O. Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur) Madhya Pradesh.
Represent; ig Workmen-—Shri Rambilas Sobhnath, Secretary, M-P- Colliery Workeis' Federation, P-O. Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur) Madhya Pradesh-
It is hereby agreed between the parties to refer the following industrial dispute to the arbitration of Shri P. C. Kai, Regional Labour Commissioner . (Central;, Jabalpur.
(i) Specific matters in. dispute.
(I; Whether the Madhya Pradesh Colliery Workers' Federation is competent to raise the dispute specified in item II below?
(II) If so, whether the retrenchment of Sarvashri Chuna Prasad and Krishna Dutta, Watchmen, Banki Colliery with effect from 24lh August 1967 was legal and justified? If not, to what relief is he entitled? (iij Details of the parties to the dispute including the name and address of the establishment or undertaking involved. Employers in relation to the Banki Colliery of M/s- National Coal Develop- ment Corporation Limited, P.O- Banki Mogra (District Biluspur) Madhya Pradesh ;md their workmen represented by Madhya Pra- desh Colliery Workers' Federation, P O. Banki Mogra (District Bilas- pur) Madhya Pradesh,
(ill) Name of the Union, if any, representing the workmen- in question.
Madhya Pradesh Colliery Workers' Federation, P O. Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur;.
(iv) Total Number of workmen employed in the undertakina affected.
1250.
(v) estimated number of workmen affected or likely to be of acted by the dispute.—2
4<$o Trtft GAZETTE Of INDIA : M £. 16, i9B7/Ac,RAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I i-We further agree that the decision of the Arbitrator shall be binding on us.
The arbitrator .shall make his award within a period of 3 months or within such further time as is extended by the mutual agreement between us in writing. In case the award Is not made within the period aforementioned, the reference to arbitration shall stand automatically cancelled and we shall be Iree to negotiate for fresh arbitration.
Representing Employers:
Representing Workmen.
Sd/- In Hindi
HAMBILAS SOBHNATH, Sd/- S. R. MATHER, 7/11/67 Witnesses: 1. Sd/- P. S. RAO,
2- Sd/- A- B. MATHUR, Bilaspur, dated the. 1th November, 1987.
[No. 5/70/67/LRIL]
S.O, 4438.—Whereas an industrial dispute exists between the Banki Colliery of Messrs National Coal Development Corporation Limited, Post Office Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur) (hereinafter referred to as the said company) and their work- men represented by the M.P, Colliery Workers' Federation (INTUC), Post Office Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur) (hereinafter referred to as the Union);
And whereas the said Company and the Union have by a written agreement, in pursuance of the provisions of subsection (l) of section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), referred the said dispute to the arbitration of the person specified therein, and a copy of the said arbitration agreement has been forwarded to the Central Government;
Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the said arbitration agreement, which was received by it on the 21st November, 1967.
Agreement
(UNDER SECTION 10A OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947)
BETWEEN
Names of the parties.
Shri S- P. Mathur, Dy. Supdt of Collieries, Banki Colliery of M/s- -N.C.D.C- Ltd., P. O. Banki Mogra
(District Bilaspur) M. P.
Representing Workmen.
Shri Rambilas Sobhnath, Secretary, MP- Colliery Workers' Federation, P. O. Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur). M. P.
It is hereby agreed between the parties to refer the following industrial dispute to the arbitration of Shri P. C. Ral, Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Jabalpur.
(i) Speci/lc matters in dispute.
(I) Whether the Madhya Pradesh Colliery Workers' Federation is competent to raise the dispute specified in item II below?
(II) If so, whether the retrenchment of Shri Amol Das s/o Daya Das, General Mazdoor Cat- I- w-e.f- 3rd August, 1967 was legal and justified? if not, to what relief is he entitled?
(ii) Details of the parties to the dispute including the name and address of the establishment or undertaking involved.
Employers in relation to the Banki Colliery of M/s, National Coal Development Corporation Limited, P- O. Banki Mogra (District Bilaspur) M. P- and their workmen represented by the M P. Colliery Workers' Federation, P. O- Banki Mo£r" (District Bilaspur) M. P.
SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INniA : DEC. 16, I"fl7/AGRAHAYANA 3*, 18W 4O8I(iii) Name of the union^ if any, representing the workmen, in question.
Madhya Pradesh Colliery Workers' Federation. P. O- Bank! Mogr" (District Bllaspur) M. P.
(iv) Total number of workmen em-ployed in the undertaking a;£fected 1250.
(v) Estimated number uf workmen affected or likely to be affected bv the dispute.
1.
We further agree that the decision of I he Arbitrator shall be binding on us. The arbitrator shall make his award within a period of 3 months or within such further time HS is extended by the mutual agreement between us in writing- In case the award in not make within the period aforementioned, the reference to arbitration shall stand automatirally ct-mcelled and we shall be free to negotiate for fiesh arbitration Representing Employers. Representing Workmen. (Sd.) RAMBILAB SOBHNATH. (Sd,) S. P. MATHUR.
7-11-1967
Witnesses:
1. (Sd.) P. S. RAO.
2. (Sd.) A. D- MATHUR.
BILASPUR :
Dated, the 1th November 1967.
[No. 5/71/87.LR.I1.]
S.O. 4439.—Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in relation to the Mudldlh Colliery, Post Office Sijua, District Dhanbad of Messrs Burraker Coal Company Limited of whifh Messrs Bird & Company (P) Limited, Post Office Sijua, District Dhanbad, are Managing Apents, 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 said dispute for adjudication;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-sec- tion (1) of section 1(1 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby refers the said dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Dhnnhad, constituted under section 7A of the said Act.
SCHEnuLE
Whether the action of the management of Mudidih Colliery, Post Office Sijua, District Dhanbad of Messrs Burraker Coal Company Limited "of which Messrs- Bird & Company (P) Limited, Post Office Sijua, District Dhanbnd, are Managing Agents, in rendering- idle S/Shri Jagdish Narain Lall, Store Clerk, Gope Saw and Badrl Chamar, Store Mazdoors with effect from the HOth April, 19f>6, then suspending them with effect from the 13th May, 1966, and subsequently terminating their services with etfect from thej 7th October, 1960. were justified? If not, to what relief are the workmen concerned entitled?
[No. 2/135/87-LR.II-]
New Delhi, the 1th December 1967
S.O. 4440.—Whereas an industrial dispute exists between employers in rela- tion to the Manikpur Colliery of Messrs National Coal Development Corporation Limited and their workmen represented by the Madhya Pradesh Colliery Wor- kers' Federation, Post Office Korba Collery, District Bilaspur;
And whereas the said empToyers and the workmen have by a written agree- ment in pursuance of the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947"), referred the said dispute to arbitration by the person specified therein, and a copy of the said arbitration agreement has been forwarded to the Central Government;
4582THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DEC. IS, 19G7/AGRAHAYANA 25, 1889 [PART I I-' Now therefore in pursuance of the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the said arbitration agreement, which was received by it on the 28th November, 1967.
Agreement
(Under Section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947)
BETWEEN
Names of the Parties:
Representina Emvloners.—Shri C. R- Bhattnrhariee De°utv Superintendent of Collieries. Manikpur Collierv of M/s. National Coal Development Corporation Limited P.O. Korba CoPieries, District Bilaspur, M.P.
Representivg Workmen.—Shri B- N- P. Sinha. Organisirs; Secretary CHors), Madbya Prp.desh Co']iery Workers' Federation, P.O. Korba Collieries, District Bilaspur, M.P.
• It is hereby agreed between the parties to refer the following Industrial Dis- pute to the arbitration of Shri C. Balram, Deputv General Manager (Tech.), National Coal Development Corporation Limited, Ranchi.
(i) Specific fmafter in dispute
Whether the initial sanction nf 1 its subsequent withdraw"! in ^t:3,"es were in conformitv vith the T)n"ral Winner's Hrrulnr W.te*- Nn. 10C15M0/NCDC/PA/60-Pt 1. dated 10th September 15)64? If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled?
(ii) Dpfii'.' of the -parties to the disvute including the name and address of the . establishment or undertaking involved
Errralovers m relation to Maniknur Collierv nf M/s. National Co°l Devplon- men+ Corporation Limited P O. Korh? collieries. District Bilaspur M.P and their workmen represented by the M.P. Colliery Workers' Federation, P.O. Korba Col- lieries. District Bilaspur, M.P.
Ciii) Name of the union, if ami, representing the viorkmen in question
Madhya Pradesh Colliery Workers' Federation, P.O. Korba Collieries, District Bilaspur, M.P.
50
Sd/- C- R. BHATTACHARJKE.
sd/- B. N SINHA.
l.Sd/-D. S. PAWAHA
2. Sd/- A. S. GUPTA
57r, 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF TNDU : )>EC. 16, 1M7/AGRAHAVANA EG. 1889- 4683(Department oi! Labour and Employment)
New DcVn, the 1st D'V.-pmb'pr 13H7
S,0, 4441,—In exercise of the powers confeired by sub-scclion (2) of section 5 nf tht Do(k Wo ke-s (Regulation if Employment) Act, 1048. the Central Govern- ment hereby appoints Shxi M- da Lima Leitao as a member representing the ("nplovers of dock workers and sMpr):i# conrraiies on tlie Dock Workers Advisory Conmittee vice Shrl N^tsklas M. Dattini, resigned, a id makes the following furthpr amendment in the notification of the Government of India, in the late Ministry r.f Labour and Employment No. S. O 2433 d a t ei the 17th August 19R3, nam?ly: —
In the said notification, under the heading, "Members representing the employers 0/ dnck workers and shipping comrtanies", in item (R), for the entry "Shit Narsidas M- Dattani", the entry "Shri M- da T;ima Leitao" shall be substituted.
[No. 528/75/fl4-Fac. II.1
K- D. HAJELA, Under Secy
(Department of Labour and Employment)
New Delhi, the 4th December 1967
S.O. 4442.—Whereas Shri Ramji Singh, a member of the Central Cool Mines Rescue Stations Committee, has ceased to be a member of the said Committee by virtue of the provisions of clause (a) of rule 6 of the Coal Mines Rescue Rules 1959;
Now, therefore, in pursuance of clause (tvi of sub-ruie (1) of rule U of the Coal Minos Rescue Rules 1959, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Sfatick Banerjee to be a member of the Central Coal Mines Rescue Stations Com- miUe" nii-i> Sbri Ramji Sinyh and makes the follmvinR amendment in thp noti<"'~ cation of the Government of India in the late Ministry f f Labour and Employment No. S.O. 3310 dated the 23rd October 1965, namely:—
Tn the said notification for the entry against serial No. 7, the following entry anall be substituted, namely:—
"Shri Sfatick Banerjee, Saltore Colliery, P,O- Saltore, District Burdwan"-
TNo, 14/26/67-MI.]
New Delhi, the 5th December 1967
S.O. 4443.—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 Shrl L. P. Choudhary as Inspector of Mines subordinate to the Chief Inspector oi Mines and makes the followinR farther amendment in the rotiflcatlon of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment S-O- 531 dated 1he 2nd March, I9fi1 namely:—
In the said notification the follows? entry shall be artued at the end namely:—
"109 Shri L. P. Choudhury."
LNo. 8/40/flfl-M.I 1
J D. TEWARI, Under Secy.
(Department of Rehabilitation^
(Office of the Regional Settlement Commissioner)
Jullundur. the 30th November 1967
SO 4444. In exercise of the powers conferred on me by Section 34(3) of the bi'splaced Poisons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (44 of 1954),
4684 T HE GAZETTE OF INDIA; DEC. H>, 19G7/AGRAHAYANA 23, 1889 [PART I I-I Karta Krishan, Regional Settlement Commissioner, delegate to Shri S- N. Bah1, Assistant Settlement Commissioner, Jullundur my following powers with ettect from 10th November, 1!I67: —
1. To hear and decide appeals under Section 22 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954.
2. To decide cases falling under sub-section (b) of Section 9 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954-
3- To hear and decide the objections under rule 92 of the Displaced Persons (Compensatlaon and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955, against the sale of any property and acquired urban agricultural "land, made under rule 90 and 91 of the Displaced Persona (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955, where the bids have been approved by the Managing Officers.
4- To evaluate the acquired evacuee urban agricultural lands under Rule 34-B of Chapter VA of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955
I No. RSCJ/23/23/20/67-Admn.]
KARTA KRISHEN,
Regional Settlement Commissioner, Jullundur.
(Department of Rehabilitation)
(Office of the Chief Settlement Commissioner)
New Delhi, the 6th Deceinber 1967
S.O. 4445. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section (i) of Section 3 of Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (44 of 1954), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Harish Chander, Assistant Settlement Commissioner Incharge, Jaipur as Settlement Commissioner for the purpose of performing the functions assigned to such officers by or under the said Act.
[No. 5(2V63 ARG ]
SO 4446 In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-Section (1) of Section 6 of the'Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 (XXXI of 1950), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Harish Chander. Assistant Settlement Commis- sioner Incharge, Jaipur as Custodian for the State of Rajasthan for the purpose of duties imposed on Custodian by or under the said Act with effect from 21st Novem- ber. 1967.
[No. 5(2)/63 ARG-1
A. G. VASWANI.
Settlement Commlssloner(A) & Ex-Offlcio Under Secy
PRINTED IN INDIA BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA PRESS, NEW DELHI AND PUBLISHED BY THE MANAGER OF PUBLICATIONS. DELHI, 1967
- such procedure during UK- period for which permission has been granted to him. ↩
- Group of monuments, North:—Survey namely:— Velha Goa. 142532-65 Sq. mts. Hlla Goa. Goa, Daman and Diu. (i) Se'Cathedral (if) Church and Con- vent of St. Francis plot Nos. 9, 12, 15, remaining portion of sur- vey pint Nos. 16,14, 36 and River Mandovi. of Assisi. (in) Chapel of St. Cathe- East:—Survey rine. (iv) Chapel of St. Caje- tan. (v) Arch of Vicerov (vi) Arch of Adil Shah's Palace. Survey plot Nos. 2 6A. 6B, 7, 10, 11, 17, 18,29, 34. 176,177, part of survey plolNos. 14,16, 35> 36, 175,178, 179, 183 and unnumbered survey plots including roads and adjoining open area as «hown in the plan reprodu- ced below. Survey Plot Nos. 6A, 10, 11,17, 18,29, 34J 175, 1763 177,178, 179, 183 and un- numbered survey plots including roads and ad- joining space: Government owned. Re- maining under private ow- nership. plot Nos. 39, 41, 25,26, 33J 32, 31,30,28, 24, 23, public road and remaining portion of sur- vey plot No. 175. (vii) House of Bull. (viii) Basilica of Bom Je- sus. South:—Survey (ix) Chapel of St. Fran- cis Xavier and con- nected buildings. (x) Largo of St. Francis Xavier. t plot Nos. 199. 197, 192, 191, and remaining portion of sur- vey plot Nos. 178, 179 (now included in pub lie road) and par of public road. (xO Largo of St. C ↩
- ?S a trans^r S ^ c ^ ^ O ^ . J ^ ^ ' S t S ' S LX ffiL 5 ffr&ffif ↩
- r? \*' W h e t h er t he oflence committed n L +^ u \ K workman was nne involving moral turpitude. In tbiq con- nection it is necessary to state the facts of the case Shrl Gurdev Sineh was working as an Armed Guard in the State Bank of Bikaner andJaipur W b o h a? ↩
- ↩
- ↩
- f°r de'! ↩
- l ↩
- 30-9-67 Rv consent Do. 1962. Copv of notice under Section 9A of the I.D. Act, 1946 dated 14-11-64. Do. Do. (Sd.) Illegible, Presiding Officer, Central Government Additional Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad ↩
- 3 3 3 ↩
- Tntal number of workmen employed ir. the undertaking effected 450. (v) Estimated number of workmen affected or likely to he affected by the dispute We further agree that the decision of the Arbitrator shall be binding on us. The Arbi+T-rttor shall rank" his award within a period of three months or within such further time r>s is extended hv the mutual agreement between us in writing. In case the Award i^ not made within the neriod aformentioned the reference to Arbitration shall stand automatically cancelled and we shall be free to negotiate for fresh arbitration. Representing Employers Representing workmen in-H-67 19-11-67. Witnesses: Korba. dated the 19th November, 1967 [No. 5/77/67-LRIL] BALWANT SINGH, Under Secy. ↩