REGISTERED No. D. (D.N.)—73
The Gazette of India
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 44] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904
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 Government of India (other than the Ministry of Defence)
MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE & COMPANY AFFAIRS
(Department of Justice)
New Delhi, the 14th October, 1982
S.O. 3656.—In pursuance of sub-section (2) of section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971), the Central Government hereby specifies that Shri Joaquim Dias, Government Advocate to the Government of Goa, Daman and Diu to be the Law Officer for the purposes of the said sub-section, in relation to the Union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu.
[No. 26/3/82-Jus.] S. K. SHARMA, Dy. Secy.
850 GI/82-1
(3867)
3868 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KART1KA 8, 1904 [PART 1 1 - S EC 3(ii)](Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms)
ORDER
New Delhi, the 7th October, 1982
MINIS! RY OF HOME AFFAIRS
New Delhi, the 2nd September, 1982
S.O. 3657.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of Ibe Official Language1* (use for Official purposes of the union). Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies the following officer of the Ministiy of Home Affairs, the Staff whacof have ucquiicd the working knowledge of Hindi :—
1. Office of the Inspector General of Police, Sector, 3, C. R. P. F. New Delhi.
2. Office of the Dy, inspector General of Police C. R P. F. New Delhi.
3. Gioup Centic, C. R. P. F., New Delhi. 4. Battalion No. 47. 1 Battalion No. 54. 6. Biitulion No. 55, 7. Battalion No. 71. 8. Base Hospital First, C.R.P.F. New Delhi. 9. Group Centic, C.R.P.F, Gandhi NHgar.
10. Battalion No. 24. 11. Battalion No. 37. 12. Battalion No. 68 13. Dy. Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. Ajmer. 14. Group Centie, C.R.P.F. Aimer. 15. Battalion No, 3. 16. Battalion No. 9. 17. Battalion No, 33. 18. Battalion No. 40. 11. Group Cenhe-2, C.R.P.F. Ajmer. 20. Battalion No, 13. 21. Battalion No. 14, 22. Battalion No. 61. 23. Battalion No. 67. 24. Dy. Inspector General of Police C. R. P. F, Srinajiar. 25. Group Centie, C.R.P.F. Banthb. 26. Battalioi> No. 2. 27. Battalion No. 20. 28. Battalion No 22. 29. Battalion No 16.
[No. 12017/1 /82-Hindi] I. S. BIST, Dy. Secy, S.O. 3658.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (1 ) of section 5 read with section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946), the Central Government with consent of the Government of Gujarat, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Estab- lishment to the whole of the State of Gujdrat for the investigation of offences ^unisaaable under sections 304-A, 435 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of I860.), and attempts, abctments and conspiracies in ielation to or in connection with the said offences and any other offence committed in the couise of the same transaction arising out of the same facts in regard to case No. 292/82 legislered at P. S. Padia, Bnroda Rural District in the State of Gujarat.
FNo. 228/7/82-AVD. Ill H. K. VFRMA, Under Secy.
3869MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Depaitmcnt of Rc\enue)
New Delhi, the- 16th October, 1981
INCOME-TAX
S.O. 3659.-—H is heicby notified foi geneial informa- tion that the institution mentioned below has been approv- ed by the Secretary, DepaitmeiH of Science & Technology, New Delhi, the prescribed aulhojity for the purposes of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 read with rule 6(iv) of the Income-tax Rule1!, 1962 irndcr the Cdtegoiy o1 " Vssoeiation" in the aioa of othei natural and applied sciences, subject to the following conditions ; —
d) That the Bhandan Balweerchand Pratapchand Memorial Research l'oundation, Bombay will maintain a separate account of sums teccivcd by it for scientific repaid) in the field of uatuial and applied sciences other than agricultuie[nnimal hus- bandrylfisliciies and medicines ;
(ii) That the said Association will furnish Annual Return of iti scientific lescaich activities to the Pi escribed Authority for every financial year in such forms as may lie laid down and intimated to them for this purpose by 30th Aptil each year:
fiii) That the said Association will submit the Annual Return and statement of accounts to the concerned Commissioner of Income-tax, every year.
INSTITUTION
Mis. Bhandati Balweerchand Piatap Chand Memorial Research Foundation, Uombay.
This notification is valid from 28-8-1981 to 31-3-1983.
[No. 4265/F. No. 203/26G/80-ITA TtJ M. K. PANDEY, Dy. Secy.
New Delhi, the 12th October, 1982
HEADQUARTERS hSFABLISHMEN V
S.O. 3660.—In exercise of the poweis coniened by *ulc 3 of the Central Board of Excise & Customs (Regula- tion of Transaction of Business) Rules, 1964, the Central Government heieby appoint* Shri G. S. Sawhney an officer of the Indian Customs & Central Excise Service and posted as Member, Central Board of Excise & Customs as Chair- man, Central Board of Excise & Customs with effect from the 12th October, 1982 for ouc yeai. The period beyond supei annuation i.e. the 31st May, 1983 beina treated as extension of-service.
[F. No. A. 19011/23/79-Ad. 1} G. S. MEHRA, Undei Secy.
New Delhi, the 11th Oaobei, 1982 INCOME-1 AX
S O. 3661.—In puis.iian.Lc of sulvcluuse If) of clause (in) of sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (43 of 19ol), the Central Government heie- by notifies the Textile Coipoiation of Marathwada Limited, Amangabad, for the purposes ot the said sub-clause
[K No 275/26 82-lTlB)] R C. IIANDA, D\. Secy,
(Department of Economic Affiiiis)
(Bunking Division)
New Delhi, the 12th Octobci, 1982
S.O. 3662.—In pursuance of clause (d) of •sub-section (1) of section 8 ot the Reseive Hank of India. Act, 1934 (2 of 1934), and in supersession of. the notification of the Government of Iildia in the Department of Economic Affairs (Banking Division) No. F, 7|2|80-BO.I, dated 19th April, 1980, the Cential Government hejeby nominates Shri M. Narasimham, to be a Diiector on the Central Board of the Reserve Bank of India.
[No F. 7|10/82-BO.I(l /]
S.O. 3663.—In pursuance of sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-setlion (1) of section 6 of the Industrial Deve- lopment Bank of India Act, 1964 (18 of 1964), the Central Government hereby nominates £>hri M. Na' asimham, Sec- retary, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Fin- ance as the Diiector of the Tndus.tii.il Development Bank of India vice Shri R. N. Malhotia.
[No t- 7|10/8?-l)OI<2)] R. K KAUL Addl Secy.
3870 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(n)JCentral Excise Collectorate : Madya : Pradesh
NOTIFICATION NO. 12/82
S, O. 3664 : — Consequent upon their p omotion as
Superintendent, Cunt-al Excise, Gioup 'B'
[C. NO. II(J)9-Con/82/K71] S. K. DHAR, Collector.
3871
MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY
(Department ol Heavy Jndustt.,)
ORDfcR
New Delhi, the 13th October, 1982
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE
(Office of the Chief Controller of Imports, and Expoits)
New Delhi, the 4th October, 1982
S.O, 3665.—Mrs. Neeta ArvuiJ Bhandaii, Panoiama, 203, Valkeshwar Road, Bombay-6 was granted a CCP No. " / J/ 0391049 dated 14th June, 1982 foi Rs. 52316 only for the import of one Mercedes Benz 200, 612-Z-2534 cat
The applicant has applied for issue of a Duplicate Copy of the above mentioned CCP on the giound that the original CCP has been lost. It has further been stated that the original CCP was not legistered with any Custojn Authorily and as such the value of the CCP has not been utilised at all.
2. In support of her contention, the licensee has filed tin affidavit, duly sworn before the Notary Public, Bombay. I am accordingly satisfied that the original CCP No, P / J/ 0391049/N/MP/83|H|82 dated 14th June, 1982 has been lost or misplaced by the applicant, In exirekc of powers conferred under Sub-clause 9(CL) of the Import Control Order 1955 dated 7th December, 1955, as amended from time to time, the said original CCP No. P/J7O391u49/N|]VH"|83| H/82 dated 14th June, 1982 issued to Mrs. Neeta Aivind Bhandari is hereby cancelled.
3. A duplicate copy of the CCP is being Issued to M[S. Neeta Arvind Bhandari separately,
[F. No. A-145/82-83/BLS/2362J
T. P. SINGHAL, Dy. Chief Controller of Imports & Exports S.O. 3666.—In exercise of UK owci; conferred by Section 6 of the Industries (Development anJ Regu- lation) Act, 1951 (65 of 19J1) lead wilh Rules 2- 4 and 5 of the. Development Council (Procedur.il) Rules, 1952, the Central' Government hereby appoints the following reison to be a member of the Development Council constituted by tho Order of the Government of India in ihe Department of Heavy Industry Order dated IKth Tuly, ly"1 for the Sche- duled Industries engaged in the manufactuic or production of Textile Machinery and diicfts that following amendment shall be made in the said Ordei namely ;—
In the said Order, for the entry occmnng against Seiial No. 3, the following entry shall be substituted namely ;—-
3, Shii G. S. Gtewal, Mtmbci/Secretary Joint Secretaiy, Department of Heavy Industry.
[218I|TM|DC|H(|R1/No. 3-33/8I-HMU)]
S. KANNAN. Director
MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE
(Department ol Health!
CORRIGENDUM
New Delhi, the 30lh August, 1982
S.O. 3667.—The woid "continuous" appearing in .sub- rule (3) of rule 2 of this Ministry's Notification No F 24-5/70-CGHStP) dated the 25th Mny, 1982 may be sub- stituted by the word "contiguous",
[No. F. 24-5/70-CGHS(P)]
K. T,. BHATIA, Under Stcy.
3872 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
And further in exercise of power conferred by sub-section (4) of that section, the Central Government dirtcts that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vests on this date of the publication of this declaration in the Oil & Natural Gas Commission free from encumbrances.
SCHEDULE
Pipeline from wall No. KOD - 6 to G.C.S.
State: Gujarat District : Mohsana Toiuka : KPIOI
ViMauo Block No. Hoctaie A'e Contiare
Borisana 135 0 11 - 55
_ 137 0 10 05
[No. 12016/22/82-Prod. II]
MINISTRY OF ENERGY
(Department of Petroleum) New Delhi, the 8th October, 1982
S.O. 3668.—Whereas by notification of the Government of Indiu in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals & Fertilizer, (Department of Petroleum) S. O. 2333 dated 17-6-82 under bub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of a°er in lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipe- line;
Anj whciens the Competent Authority has under Sub- Scection (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Government;
And further whereas the Cenettal Government has, after considering the said report, decided to acquire the right of user in the lands* specified in the schedule appended to this notification ;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by sub- section (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, th.c Cejitial Government hereby declares that the right of user in the SiU'd lands specified in the schedule appended to this noti- fication hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;
3873
New Delhi, ihc 11 111 Oclohci, 1982
S.O. 3669.—Whcieas hy nolificajjon of the CmvL-inriieu* of India in the Ministty of Petroleum, Chemicals & Feertili2(.'r, -(Department of Petroleum) S. O. No. 2761 dated 10-10-1981 Lindei sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Hcti oleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Righl of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government dcclaied its intention to acquire the right of. user in lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification foi Ilic purpose of laying pipeline ;
And wheieas the Competent Authority has under Sub- Section (1) of Section 6 of (he said Act, submitted ieport to the Government.
And further wheteas the Cenetral Government has, after considering the said report, decided to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to ibis notification ;
Now, therefore, in exerei-e of the power conferred by sub- section (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, the Cenbal Government hereby declares that the light of user in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to lhis noti- fication heieby acquired for laying the pipelines;
- And further in exercise of power conferred by sub-section (4) of that section, the Central Government directs that the light of user in the snid lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vest on this date of the publication of this declaration in Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd., free from -nctimbranccs.
SCHEDULE
Pipelino from Uran To minal to Doepek Fe tilize s ?r.d
Petrochemicals Corporation Limited, Tnloja.
State—Maharashtra
District R;iiged Taluka-Uran
Village
S. No. H. No. Aiea
Sq. Mct
1
2
3
4
Fundc
101
1
3 4 5 8 9 11 12
n
14 15
16 17 19
100
20 1
96
4 5 10 1
5
10 11 13 14
95
1 2 5
6. 3
1.00 18.00 15.00 07.00 75,00 25.00 01 00 06.00 20 00 05.00 05.00 02.00 10 00 10.00 02.00 02 00 12.00 12,00 20.00 16.00 16.00 20,00 20.00 ,16.00 24.00 OS. 00 08.00 24 00 52.00 22 00 22.00 32.00 2.00
3874 THE G AZCT IT; OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I- SEC. 3(ii)]
1
4
3
Fun 'c—.oucld 94
3
4 5
92
7 1 ^2
93
4
5 6 1
74
3
4
75
5 6 10 1
1
76
4 1 *>
77
3 1 1
78
T
3 1
79 Nallti
04.00 02.00 18.00 28.00 26.00 32.00 16.00 04 00 02 00 12.00 24.00 04 00 12.00 18.00 20.00 36.00 02.00 02.00 18.00" 20 00 18.00 17.00 22.00 24,00 12.00 38. Of 06.00 20 00 18.00 24..00 13.00
[No. 12016/41/81-Prod.]
S.O. 3670.—Wheieas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals & Ftrtilizei, (Department of Petroleum) S. O. 1920 dated 10-5-82 under sub-section (1) of Slction 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines Requisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (SO of 1962), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the ritfht of ir.er in lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipe- line;
And whereas the Competent Authority has under Suh- Section (I I "f Section 6 of the said Act, submitted icpoU to trie Government.
And further whereas the Cenetral Government has, aftei considering the said report, decided to acquire the right of in the lands specified in the schedule' appended to this notification ;
Now, thciefore, in exerci-e of the power conferred by sub- scciion (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, llie Central Government hereby declares that the- right of user in the saij l-inds specified in the schedule appended to this noti- ficulion hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;
And finther in cxeicisc of power conferred bv subjection (4) of that section, the Central Government directs that the right of user inr the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vests on this date of the publication of this declaration in the Oil & Natural Gas Commission free from encumbrances.
3875
SCHEDULE
Pipeline from south Santhal GGS to N.K. GGS I
Stato dujarat District & Taluka : Moshana
Village Block No. Hectare Are Centiare
Jotana 1126 0 01 45
1125 0 03 00
1124 0 01 50
Cart track 0 00 20
1123 0 02 60
1088 0 02 65
1089 0 01 75
1085 0 01 75
1083 0 02 75
1082 0 03 10
10S1 0 01 50
i080 0 01 50
1071 0 03 00
1072 02 25
1073 0 02 05
1057 0 01 30
1056 0 02 60
1054 0 02 90 CORRIGENDA
1059 0 00 70 New Delhi, the 8th October, 1952
Cart track 0 00 25
1023 S.O. 3672.—In the notification of the Government of
0 0b 40
1021 0 India in the Ministry of Energy (Department of Coal) No.
03 35
1018 0 02 S.O. 1540, dated the 31st Match, 1982, published at pages
20
980 0 12 30 1695 to 1696 of the Gazette of India. Part II, Section 3,
Sub-Section (ii), dated the 17th April, 1982 at page 1696, in
[No. 12016/1/82-Prod-II] the schedule, against serial No. 13 relating to Waghoda vil-
L.M. GOYAL.Diiector lage in column 6, for "28.675" read "38.675".
[No. 19/16/82-CL]
MINISTRY OF ENERGY
SWARAN SINGH, Under Secy.
(Department of Coal)
CORRIGENDA
New Delhi, the 8th October, 1982
S.O. 3671.—In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Energy (Department of Coal) No. S.O. 760, dated the 11th February, 1982, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, tub-section (ii), dated the 27th February, 1982.
at page 874 in the first column
(i) in line 47
for "1661 to 1619" read "1616 to 1619";
(ii) in line 53
for "2677 to 2709"
read "2677 to 2706".
[No. 19/68/81-CL)
850GI/81-2
3876 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982| KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I ~ S E C. 3(ii)i
1
3
4
5
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
40 16 19 94 25 72 73 75
75 69 68 67 39 42 561 562 563
564
VP
0 0 0 0
10 04 21 17 03 05 02 09 02 05 04
60 33 16
[No. 12016/60/81-Frod. I]
New Delhi, the 11th October, 1982
S.O. 3673.—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals & Fej tilizcr, (Department ot Petioleum) S.O. 131 dated 23-12-81 under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of user iti Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline;
And whereas the Competent Authority nas under Sub- Section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Government;
And further wheioas the Central Government has, after considering the said report, decided to acqinie the right of nier in the lands specified in the scheule appended to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (t) of the Section 6 of the said Act, ihe> Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further in exercise of powers confered by sub- section (4) of that section, the Cental Government directs that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vests on this dnfe of the publication of this declaration in the Oil & Natural Gas Commission free, from encumbrances.
SCHEDULE
PIPELINE FROM WELL NO. 81 TO BOOTH NO. 2
STATE : GUJARAT DISTRICT : BHARUC
TALUK A : ANKLESHWAR
Village
Block No.
Are
Hec- tare
Conti- aro
1
2
3 4 5
Sarthan
82
57
83 74
0 0 0
73
0
11 06 17 03
24 29 38
3877
S.O. 3674.—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petioleum, Chemicals & Ferti- lizer, (Department of Petroleum) S.O. 1919 daLcd 10-5-82 under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying, pipeline;
And whereas the Competent Authority has under sub- Section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Government;
And further whereas the Central Government has, after considering the said report, decided to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to this noti- fication hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further in exercise of powers conferred by sub- section (4) of that section, the Central Government directs that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vests on this date of the publication of this declaration in the Oil & Natural Gas Commission free from encumbrances.
SCHEDULE
PIPELINE FROM JOTANA—1 TO S. SANTHAL GGS STATE : GUJARAT DISTRICT & TALUKA : MEHSANA
Village
Block No.
Are
Hect- are
Conti- are
Kasalpura
, o
902 847/P 847/P 848 850 851
7 20 60 55 40 90
0 0 0 0 0
00 04 01 15 12 03
[No. 12016/1/82-Prod.] S.O. 3675.—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals & Fertilizer, (Department of Petroleum) S.O. 2160 dated 25-5-82 under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government declared it? intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline;
And whereas the Competent Authority has under Stib- Section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act. submitted report to the Government;
And further whereas the Central Government has, after considering the said report decided to acquire the light of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to this noti- fication;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers confcried by sub-sectioin (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, the Cential Goveinment hereby declares the right of user in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to this notifica- tion hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further in exeicise of power conferred by sub- section (4) of that section, the Cental Government directs that the right of user in the said lands shall insead of vesting in the Central Government vests on this date of the publication of this declaration in the Oil & Natural Gas Commission free from encumbrances.
SCHEDULE
PIPELINE FROM VRG TO GGS VIRAJ
STATE : GUJARAT DISTRICT : MEHSANA TALUKA : KADI
Survoy No.
Village
Hect- Arc Can ti- ara ars
Nani Kadi
152/1 0 11 40
152/2 0 02 25
153/1 0 04 50
[No. 12016/17/82 Prod. I]
3878 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SBC. 3(ii)]
S.O. 3676.—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petioleum, Chemicals &. Fertilizer, (Department of' Petroleum) SO. 2159 dated 25-5-82 under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 -of 1962), the Central •Government declared its intention to acguire the light of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of lay- ing pipeline;
And whereas the- Competent Authority has under "ub-
_, Section (1) of Section 6. of the said Act, submitted report
to the Government; '^4fld! further Whereas the- Central Government has, after considering the said report, decided to acquire the right of user in the lartds specified in the schedule appended to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by lub-section (1) of the Section 6 of the Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to this notifica- tion hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further in exercise of power conferred by sub-section (4) of that section, the Central Government directs that the right of user in the said lands shall Instead of vesting in the Central Government vests on this date of the publication of this declaration in tho Oil & Natural Gas Commission free from encumbrances.
* SCHEDULE PIPELINE FROM JRF TO JHALORA II STATE': GUJARAT* DISTRICT I M E H S A N A ' T A X U K A .} KADI
Survoy No.
Village
A™ Centi- a.ro
Hect- ata
jvfaorda
o o o
244 246/1 245
03 04 01
00 05 55
[No. 12016/17-/82-Prod.-m
3879
3880 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [ P A R T I I- SEC. 3(U)J
3881
Khal between KhNos
^2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ij)]
3883
3
1
2
4
5
Massani H.
No. 190
00 r 00
oo
M.O, 3677.—Whereas by a notification of Government of India in the Ministry of Pclroleum, Chemicals and Ferti- liser iDtpmtPient or Petiolcum) S.O. 155 dated 27-2-1982 under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act 1962 (50 of 1962) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the Right of User in the lands soecl- fied in the schedule appended to thnt notification for the purpose of laying pipeline.
And whereas- ths Competent Authority hrn under Sub- section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act submitted lenort to the Government.
And further the Central Government hriK after consirlerins the said renort, decided to ncquiie ihe richt of UST In Ihe lards specified in the schedule appended to this notification.
. oi 04 08 05 02 03 00 07 04 00 03 02 03 02 01 01 00 00 00 00 17 02
Now therefore in exeicjsc of the poweis conferred by Suii-wtion (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the rifiht of user in the rnM lands specified in the schedule appended to thfci notification hereby acquired for laying the pipelines.
02 01 • 13 06 00 00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
oe
00
03 02 02
00 And further in exercise of the power, conferred by Sub- section (4) of that section, the Central Government directs thnt the rigM of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government vest on this date of the publi- cation of thii declaration in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited free from alt encumbrances.
SCHEDULE
Tohsil : Philliur Di^tt, : Jullundur State : Punjab
01 00 00 04 07
00 00 00 00 00
Name of village Khasia No.
Area
H. • A Sq.
09 09 02 12
M.
54 '80 26 95 30 84 38 30 42 19 07 50 46 11 73 15 96 96 58 19 28 69 88 15 82 34 38 00 26 88 69 54 19 77 22 49 41 22 69 67
4401 Min 4402 Min 4404 Mia 4405 Min 4406 Mm 4407 Min 4410 Min 4411 Mm 4412 Mm 4413 Mm 44t4Min •Ml 5 Mm 4416 Min 4417 Min 4418 Min 4419 Min 4420 Mm 4421 Mm 4423 Min 4414 Min 4425 Min 4426 Min 4427 Min 4418 Min 4443 Min 44^4 Min 44*5 Mm 4446 Min 4447 Min 4448 Min 4449 Min 4492 Min 4499 Min 4500 Min 4501 Min 4502 Min 4505 Min 4506 Min 4516 Min 4517 Min
06
2
3
1
4 5
00
Moroan H. No.
01
179
00
01
01
07
00 00 00 00 00 00
11 10 Min 12 Min 13/1 Min 17 Min 18/1 Min 18/2 Min 24/2 Min.
00
03 14 03 03 07 04 07
29 93 54 04 59 05 34
Maisani H. No.
0? 06 04 06
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
190
00 , 00
00 02 12
00 00 00 00 10 00
00
16
00 00 01 04 13
72 19 34 00 54 15 30 7* 14 BO* 72 96 69 10 94 58 32 34 22 82 73 77 79 38
01 00 09 05
00 00 00 00 00 00
4518 Mm 4524 Min 4596 Mul 4599 Mm 4613 Mm 4618 Min 4619 Min 4735 Min 4736 Min 4737 Min 4738 Min 4739 Min 4740 Mi I 4742 Min 4743 Min 4744 Min 4745/1 Min 4804 Min 4805 Min 4806 Min 4809 Min 4810 Min 4811 Min 4812 Min
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
02 03 05 06 01 09 00 00 01 11 11 07 00 04 00
4301 Min 4303 Min 4304 Mm 4305 Mm 4306 Min 4307 Min 4310 Min 4313 Min 4318 Min 4319 Min 4322 Min 4323 Min 4324 Mm 4325 Min 4395 Min
11 07 38 91 15 22 96 38 34 14 52 68 96 80 38
850GI/82—3
884 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I- SEC. 3(il)]
1
2
1
3
4
5
2
4
3
5
Massa.nl 4812/1 Mia 00 00 53 Dadhwarh 456 Min 00 00 38
H. No. 190 4513 Min 00 13 63 HNJ. 194. 458 Mia 00 02 11
4821 Min. 03 00 5J 483 Min 00 00 38
4893 Min 00 05 38 485 Min 00 07 10
4918 Min 00 39 36 489 Min 00 00
00
4948 Mia 00 24 00
490 Min 00 00 38
4949 Mia 00 15 94 492 Min 00 05 38
4960 Min 00 00 77
4997 Min 34 493 Min 00 07 49
00 01
5040 Min 00 14 40 494 Min 00 00 38
5041 Min 00 05 18 495 Mm 00 00 19
5042 Min 00 07 87 496 Mm 00 00 53
5055 Min 00 07 10 1516/498 Min 00 01 73
5069 Mia 00 0} 22 1600/500/1 Min 00 05 18
5069 Min 00 19 78
16O0/590/3 Min 00 00 00
5105 Mia 00 00 5a 01 71
03 1607/503/2 Min 00
5}14Mia 00 07
5115 Min 00 13 06 615 Min 00 04 80
5116Min 00 00 77 616 Mm 00 05 95
5117 Mm 00 03 65 642 Min 00 03 26
5127 Min 00 02 69 646 Min 00 03 26
5127/1 Min 00 01 15 648 Min 03 01 73
5129/1 Min 00 13 44 649 Min 00 03 45
5130 Mia 00 01 34 650 Min 00 00 58
5137 Min 00 u 52 651 Min 00 00 38
5138 Min 00 01 34 654 Min 00 00 77
5154 Min 00 00 19 674 Min 00 03 84
5155 Min 00 04
675 Mfln 00 06 91
5157 Min 00 04 OS
676 Min 00 04 99
5164 Min 00 02 It
5165 Min 00 01 5+ 6"0 Min 00 00 58
5166 Min 00 04 03 719 Min 00 09 79
5170 Mia 00 00 19 720Mln 00 00 00
5171 Mia 00 09 02 721 Min 00 06 53
5172 Min 0" 05 18 722 Min 00 02 50
5173 Min 00 01 73 03
724 Min 00 65
5175 Mia 00 46 66
42 725 Min 00 03 26
5188 Min 00 04
5189 Min 00 07 68 728 Min 00 01 73
51^0 Min 00 05 57 729 Min 00 00 77
5193 Min 00 14 59 795 Min 00 54
01
5194 Min 00 01 34
5195 Min 00 12 815 Min 00 06 14
67
5199 Min 00 07 63 816 Min 00 00 58
5201 Mia 00 08 45 817 Min 00 03 65
5205 Min 00 16 90 "19 Min 00 02 50
Dadhwarh 70 Min 00 04 99 820 Min 00 01 34
H. No. 194 71 Min 00 05 95 821 Min 00 04 80
86 Min 00 00 77 825 Min
00 01 73
87 Min 00 00 00
89 Min 00 00 77 826 Min 00 08 45
90 Min 00 06 14 827 Min 00 00 00
91 Mn 00 00 38 829 Min 00 00 38
92 Min 00 05 38
S30 Min 00 05 18
103 Min 00 01 M
104 Min 00 00 38 831 Min 00 03 45
105 Min 08 26 833 Min 00 01 34
109 Min oo00 02 50 843 Min 00 00 19
110 Min 00 00 00 8 44 Min 00 01 34
112 Min 00 11 90
845 Min 00 02 11
114 Min 00 04 80
129 Min 00 01 34 846 Min 00 00 58
142 Min 00 00 00 847 Min 00 00 00
143 Min 00 00 58 859 Min 00
02 11
144 Min 00 01 15 860 Min 00
15 94
14< Min 00 09 79 861 Min
00 04 42
146 Min 00 04 42
00 869 Min 00 00 58
162 Min 00 19
163 Mm 00 03 26 876 Min 00 09 60
164 Min 00 04 61 877 Min 00 00 38
165 Min 00 04 42 878 Min
00 14 21
191 Min 00 00 00
192 Min 00 00 879 Min 00 01 73
00
193 Min 00 04 42 891 Min 00 00 38
403 Min 00 00 96 893 Min 00 06 34
447 Min 00 03 26
894 Min 00 05 57
448 Min 00 06 14
452 Min 00 00 19 895 Min 00 00 38
454 Mh 00 01 73 896 Nin 00 02 88
455 Min 00 07 49 898 Min 00 05 37
3885
1
2
3
4
1
5
2
3
5
4
Mutfallu H.No. 211 3/Mln. 00 09 61 Lodian H.No. 209 Contd. 194 Min. 00 11 64
4 / M ID 00 01 26 196 Min. 00 01 52
12/Min 00 07 59 215 Min. 00 00 51
13/Min 00 05 31 216 Min. 00 10 63
14/Min 00 00 76 224 Min. 00 03 04
15Min 00 00 25 225 Min. 00 09 11
16 Mia 00 11 38 228 M m. 00 09 11
17 Min 00 01 01 229 Min. 00 09 11
20Min 00 01 77 232 M m. 00 07 08
21 Min 00 14 42 233 Min. 00 04 30
22Min 00 01 26 240 Min. 00 00 76
Khal between Kh. 245 Miff. 00 09 36
Nos. 22 & 60 Min 00 00 25 246 M m. 00 02 78
60 Min 00 01 01 247 Min. 00 12 14
304 Min 00 04 30 266 Min. 00 05 26
305 Min 00 11 89 272/1 Min. 00 01 01
306 Min 00 00 51 272/2 Min. 00 11 89
319 Min 00 03 79 273 Min. 00 10 38
320 Min 00 01 77 274 Min. 00 07 33
321 Min 00 04 05 275/2 Min.
323/1 Min 00 04 81 276 Min. 00 17 71
323/2 Min 00 07 84 277 Min. 00 02 28
324 Min 00 00 51 282 Min. 00 02 78
290 Min. _ „.
345 Min 00 03 54
357 Min 00 07 34 304 Min. 00 06 83
358 Min 00 06 07 309 Min. 00 10 88
359 Min 00 10 88 310 Min. 00 01 01
361 Min 00 04 05 311 Min. 00 06 07
312 Min. 00 00 25
361/1 Min 00 06 58
572 Min. 00 00 25
362 Min 00 00 25
364 Min 00 04 81 Dosanjh Kalan H.No. 198 , "_
168 Min.
410 Min 00 09 11
412 Min 00 07 59 170 Min. 00 08 10
413 Min 00 09 36 180 Min. 00 01 52
417 Min 00 06 07 182 Min. 00 01 01
423 Min 00 04 30 183 Min. 00 09 36
424 Min 00 02 78 184 Min. 00 04 05
425 Min 00 02 78 185 Min. 00 00 25
188 Min. 00 00 51
426 Min 00 06 32 189 Min. 00 02 53
427 Min 00 01 01 197 Min. *^- **—
428 Min 00 03 54 200 Min. 00 00 25
540 Min 00 01 26 201 Min. 00 00 25
574 Min 00 01 26 202 Min. 00 12 90
596 Min 00 02 28 204 Min. 00 02 53
597 Min. 00 07 59 205 Min. 00 00 51
211 Min. 00 00 25
598 Min. 00 00 51
211,1 Min. _ — —
599 Min. 00 04 55
600 Min. 00 03 29 212 Min. 00 05 82
603 Min. 00 01 77 213 Min. 00 05 57
606 Min. 00 09 11 217 Min. 00 11 89
607 Min. 00 08 10
622 Min. 218 Min. 00 10- 82
623 Min. 00 12 65 219 Min. 00 00 76
624 Min. 00 02 28 560 Min. 00 04 05
625 Min. ^ 561 Min. 00 04 81
626 Min. 00 11 13
630 Min. 00 07 08 562 Min. 00 03 04
631 Min. 00 05 57 582 Min. 00 11 89
632 Min. 00 00 51 595 Min. 00 00 51
634 Min. 00 05 82 597 Min. 00 05 82
Annir H.No. 210 110 Min. 00 "09 36 717 Min. 00 03 29
113 Min. 00 01 01 732 Min. — — —
114 Min. 00 12 90 733 Min. 00 02 78
115 Min. 00 03 04 735 Min. 00 02 78
116 Min. 00 00 76 1182 Min. 00 00 76
118 Min. 00 00 76 1402 Min. 00 09 61
123 Min. 00 01 01 1403 Min. 00 05 57
124 Min, 00 05 57 1405 Min. 00 00 25
123 Min. 00 03 29 1406 Min. 00 00 51
134 Min, 00 00 51 1407 Min. 00 00 51
135 Min. — — — 1408 Min. 00 02 53
136 Min. 00 15 18 1409 Min. 00 04 55
01 1413 Min. — — —
Lodian H.No. 209 176 Min. 00 01
1435 Min. — — —
177 Min. 00 11 89
191 Min. 90 01 01 1436 Min. 00 01 26
00 04 30 1437 Min. 00 05 06
192 Min.
193 Min. 00 05 06 1441/lMin. 00 00 25
3886 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)
1
2
3
5
1
2
3
4
5
00
Ki. tli Khaidaian H.N-i, 199
16 —
4
648 Min. 13
Dosa:ijh Kalan 1442 Min. 00 10 12 649 Min. —
P . N J. 198 1452 Min. 00 10 37 —contd,— 650'Min. —
—contd.— 1485 Min. 00 00 25 656 Min. 00 7fi
00
1486 Min. 00 05 06 04 55
658 Min. 00
1487 Min. 00 10 12 659 Min. 11 13
00
1488 Min. 00 10 37 700 Mii\ 00 10 88
1495 Min. 00 00 25 710 M b. 00 03 79
1496 Min. 00 05 06 711 Min. 25
00 uo
1497 Min. 00 02 02 819 Min. (10 76
00
1552 Min. 00 07 08
1553 Min. 00 10 63 [No.l20*-0/l/:.2-Prrd.]
1564 Min. 00 03 79
1566 Min. 00 05 31
1567 Min. 00 00 51
1568 Min. — — —
1569 Min. 00 12 40
1571 Min. 00 02 78
1572 Min. 00 01 26
1810 Min. 00 01 01
1826 Min. 00 04 05
1827 Min. 00 OS 60
IS JO Min. 00 01 52
1811 Min. 00 06 58
1832 Min. 00 01 - 52
1833 M m. 00 01 52
1 8 62 i\.in, 00 10 12
1865 M m. 00 — —
1872 Min. 00 00 76
1873 Min. 00 12 14
1874/1 M b. 00 04 81
1874/2 Min. 00 10 63
1875 Min. 00 08 35
1876 Min. 00 02 02
2058 Min. 00 00 76
2063 Min. 00 03 29
2064 Min. 00 01 01
2065 Min. 00 03 04
2067 M m. 00 11 3 8
2068 Min. 00 04 55
2075 M b. 00 00 76
2076 Min. 00 04 81
2077 Min. 00 06 58
2080 Min. 00 09 36
2081 Min. 00 02 78
JOtH Khakhian 542 Min. 00 01 01
H.Ni, 199 543 Min. 00 07 08
544 Min. 00 06 07
545 Min. 00 01 01
546 Min. 00 08 10
549 Min. 00 08 35
550 Min. 00 06 32
551 Min. 00 00 25
554 Min, 00 00 51
555 Min. 00 00 76
611 M m. __ . _ _
612 M m. 00 01 52
614 Min. 00 11 89
'615 Min. 00 01 26
616 Min. 00 01 52
633 Min. 00 04 05
642 Min. 00 01 52
643 Min. 00 13 41
644 Min. 00 00 51
646 Min. 00 00 25
3887
New Delhi, the 12th October, 1982
S.U. 3678.—Whereas by a notllication of Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals arid Ferti- lizer (Department of Petroleum) S.O. 952 dated 6-3-1982 urder Sub-se.t.on (1) of section 3 of the Pcttoleum and Mineirls Pipelines (Acquisition of Right nf U-,er in Land) Act, 19fi2 (50 of J962) the Central Government dc:Lued its intenon to acquire the Right of Usci in th^ Lmcli specified in ihs schedule- appended to that notifiatiori for thc puipcsc of laying pipeline.
And whereas the Competent Authority has under Sub- section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act submitted report to the Government.
And lurther the Central Government has after cnnsideiinc the said report, decided to acquire th" right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification.
Nuw, the cfore, in exercise ofc the powers confeired by Sub i,jction (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, the Centinl Government hereby declares that the right of user in the said hnds specified in (he ichedtV.e appended to this notification hereby acquired for laying the pipelines.
And further in exercise of the power conferred by Sub-section, (4) of that section, the Central Government rVecis that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in (he Central Government vest on this date of the publication of this declaration in the [ndian Oil Corpora- tion Limited free from all encumbrances.
Detain nf the Area owned by Coitral/Statc Government through which pipe lino has to pass — Tonsil Luihfaia, Distt. Ludhlana,
Khasra N->. HR RA SR
oovt.y Deptt.
SI. NaTic nf N-i. Villas* with H.B.Ni.
1 2
3 4
5
6
7
1. Salcnour H N \ 33
00 00
63 05
10 04 08 07
Local B -dies (Shama- lat Doh)
00 00 00 00 00
60 08 25 01 04 61 77
8/10 Min 11/I Mb. 12/1 Min 12/2 Min. 13/2 Min. 11/7 Min. 18/1 Min. :s/2 Min. 19 Min. 23/3 Min. 24 Min.
00 01 03 09 01 00 06
00 00 00 00
51 32
06
00
2. Garcha
E N '. 35
Central Govern-
02 04 12
00 00 00 00
ment/ Patati s Seed Farm
00 09 06
3/11 Min. 12 Min. 18 Min. 19 Min. 20 Min. 23 Min. 24 Min.
00 00
58 28 30 40 00 87 32
101 35!
08 08 04-
00 00 00
6/4 Min. 5 Min. G Min.
Pur-jab Govt./ F<~rost Dept.
"/
03
3. Haidar Nagar
H . NL 34
09 02
79 61 02
Centtal Govern- ment.
02
oo Oo 00 00
OR • 10
00 00
10 10 10
00 (10 00
00 03 04
2/19 Min. 22 Min. 23 Min. 13/2 Min. 3 Min. 8 Min. 13 Min. 18 Min. 23/2 Min. 24 Min. 16/3 M b. 4 Min.
00 00 00
28 S5 37 37 37 63 51 79 55
3888 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4
5
3
6 7
1 2
Haidar Nagar 7Min. 00 OK 85 Central
H. No. 34 14 Min. 00 05 31 Govcm-
—Contd.— 15 Min. 00 11 13 ment
16 Min. 00 03 04
17/19 Mln. 00 00 51
20 Min. 00 13 16
21 Min. 00 01 01
22 Min. 00 13 91
23 Min. 00 01 52
24/11 Min. 00 06 83
19 Mia." 00 0B 60
20 Min. 00 06 83
22 Min. 00 05 57
23 Min. 00 11 13
25/2 Min. 00 00 25
3 Min. 00 13 41
4 M b. 00 02 78
6M!n. 00 05 06
7 Min. 00 11 13
15 Min. 00 09 35
30/3 Min. 00 03 54
4 Min. 00 12 65
5 Min. 00 00 00
6 Min. 00 13 66
7 Min. 00 01 77
15 Min. 00 00 76
31/10 Min. 00 00 76
11 Min. 00 06 07
48 Min. 00 00 51
, *-
46 Mln. 00 04 30 Pb, Govt
47 Min. 00 00 51 P.W.
Dept*
[No. 12020/1/82-Prod.]
S.Q- 3679.—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in tho Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals & Ferti- lizer, (Departmentfpf Petroleum) S.O. 1781 dated 22-4-82 under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the landi specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline ;
And whereas the Competent Authority has under Sub- Section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Government;
And further whereas the Central Government has, after considering the said report decided to acquire the right of user in the landa specified in the schedule appended to this notification;
3889
Now, therefore, In exerclao of the power conferred by
tub-section (1) of the Section 6 of the snid Act, the Central
Government hereby declare! that the right of user in the
said lands specified in the schedule appended to this noti-
fication hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further in exercise of power conferred by sub-section
(4) of that section the Central Government direct? that Ihe
right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the
Central Government vests en this date of the publication of
tho declaration in the Oil & Natural GHS Commission free
from encumbrances.
SCHEDULE
Pipeline from South Santhal GGS to NK GOS I
State : Gujarat District & Taluka : Mehsana
ARE
Block No.
Village
Cen- tiare
Hec- tare
ljpura
Cart Tract 0 00 25
617 0 02 50
618 0 00 10
624 0 10 20
Cart Track 0 00 60
621 0 02 90
622 0 04 25
623 0 13 70
577 0 00 30
578 0 06 00
571 0 04 00
570 0 05 20
New Delhi, the 13th October, 1982
Cart Track 0 00 15
645 0 04 30
Cart Track 0 00 80
647 0 04 60
652 0 04 25
651 0 04 75
655 0 19 25
656 0 06 00
[NJ. 12016/2/82-Prod.]
S.O. 3680,—Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum, Chemicals & Fertilizer, (Department of Peti oleum) S.O. 1782 dated 22-4-82 under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline* (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpo"o of laying pipeline;
And whereas the Competent Authority has under Sub- Section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Government;
And further whereas the Central Government has, after considering the said report decided to acquire the rifht of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by sub- section (1) of the Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in tho said lands specified in the schedule appended to this noti- fication hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further in exercise of power conforred by sub-section (4) of that section, the Central Government directs that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Goernment vests on this date of the publication of thij declaration in the Oil & Natural GOJ ComnjlMion free from encumbrances.
1390 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ; OCTOBER 30, 1932/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)
S C H E D U LE
DEPARTMENT OF SPORTS
Pipeline fr"m South Sa^flrai HGS t<> NK GGS I
State : Guj-irat Dis rict : Ahmcdabad Taluka : Viiar.igam
A ie
Survey No. H-c-
Village
Cen- tiarc
(ai.ro
Bh.-ita.riya
30 30 60 25 45 70 90 85 85
05 02 11 00 04 00 02 01 00 05
78 77/1 76 Cart track 74/5/A 74/4 74/6 73/2 72/2 72/1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20
[NJ. 12016/3/82-Prod.J
L. M. Goyal, Director.
New Delhi, the 27th September, 1982
S.O. 3682.—In the Notification of Government nf India, Ministry of fiducaiion mid Cultuie {DcpiiHmcnt of 1 du a- t'on) S.O. No. 166(E) dtrird the 22nd M.uch. 1982 iegnrd- ing Nation-il Welfaie Fund for Sportsmen published in the Ciazctte of Indh (Extmordinary) Part'II Section 3 Sub-Section (ii), the following modifications may be made ;—
(i) The woids "Ministiy of Education and Culture1 (De- partment of Education)" wherever they occur m the Notification mnv be substituted by (he words "Department of Spoits".
(ii) In parn 3 (Sotial No. 1) "Minister of State for Edu- cation and Culture" may be :ubstitntsd by "Minis- ter of State for Supply and Snorts".
[No. F. 13-1/Sl-Dest-I (Spoitfi)] S. K. CHATURVEDT, Jt, Secy.
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS
(F&T Board)
MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION
New Delhi, the 14th October, 1982
S.O. 368X.—In exercise of the powers conferred bv Sec- tion 4 of the Air Corporations Act, 1953 (27 of 1953) and in continuation of this Mirmtiy's Notification No. AV. 18013/ 2/R2-.U. dined the 17th July. 1982, the Central Government .hereby nomin.ilrs wiih imroediale effect Sh/i J. R. D. Tata as a minfOffldal Dnector on the Board of Director of Air India.
[No. AV. 1RO13/2/82-AC] C. M. CHATURVEDI, Jt, Secy.
New Delhi, the 15th October, 1982
S.O. 3683.—'In pursuance of para (a> of Section III of
Rule 434 of Indian Telegraph Rules. 195], as introduced by S,O. No. 627 dated 8th Maich, 1960, the Director Gene- lal. Posts and Telegraphs, hereby specifies lit November, 1982 as the date on which the Measured Bute SyiUrn will be introduced in Curchorem Telephone Fxchnnge, Maharash- tra Circle.
[No. 5-9/82-PHB]
New Delhi, the 20th October, 1982
S.O. 3684.—In pursuance of para (a) of Section III of Rule 434 of Indian Tclegrdch Rules, 1951 as introduced by S O No. 627 dxied Kih March. I960, the Director Gene- r0, Posts and Telegraphs, hereby specifies 1st November, 1982 as the date on whrh the Me isured Rate System will be introduced in RANNI/RANNI-HDAMAN/VECHOOCHIRA telephone Fxchangcs. Kerala Circle.
[No. 5-10/82-PHB]
R. C, KATARlA, Asstt. Director Genl. (PHB)
3891
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND REBTABXHATION
(Department of Rehabilitation)
New Delhi, the 2ist September, 19S2
S.O. 3685—In cxeicise of the poweis conferied bv Mib- seetion (2) cf Section 34 of the Dis "laced Persons (Com- ren-ation and Febabilititfon) Act. 1954 (No. 44 of 1954), the Chief Settlement Commi sioner hereby de crates to Shri M. K Kan"?l Under Secretary in tV Depgrfrient of Reh- abilitation, appointed as Settlement Commissioner vi^e Noti- fication of even numbe: > r' date hi power-, under Sections 23 and 24 of the said Act for the purpose of heaimg ap- peals and revisions under these Sections.
2 This supe^edes Notification No. l(7)|Srl. CeUl82 SS.
ll(B), dated the (S|10th May, 1982.
[No. 1(18)/Spell Cc'!/R2 <=STFB>j
(Department of Labour)
S. K. BASU, Chief Settlement ConwH-sto er
New Delhi, the 15th October, 19&2
S.O. 35S6.—In exejci->e of the powers confer) ed by section 6
of the L'l'-noitoqe and Dolomite Mwes Labour Welfare Fund Act 1972 (61 of 1972) lead with sub-mlo (2) of rule 3 of the Li-m tono and Dolo-nitq Mmes Labour Welfare Fund Rules 1973 I^Q Cent ?\ Go\e"nmeat he*eby constitutes an Adviroiy C->'Tfii tos f> the "t?te of Gujarat consisting of the following risiiba s namely:—
1. Mi iisie" of St?to for Labour Ch?i, mrn
2. Wilfi. e Co-Mit"ione*, Vice-Chai>rnan-ex-Offic;o
Libau', Wolf? e Fund O gani-^ition, Bhilwa'a.
3. Assistant Lebou" Cential Gove-nment jepte-
Comnaissiono (Central), sentative-ex-ofBcio Ahmoisbcd
4. Sh i Shnsh'k'intLakffni, Membe1 of the Legislative Mamb3 of the Legislative Assembly of the State of As^e nbly, Gujarat. Safyp. Navin Mandii Road, Porfonda.- (Gujarat).
5 Shri M.L Rsthi. Rep'esentative of the Lime- Pre^'dont, stone and Dolomite Mine Sh ea Digvijay Cement Co. Ownei s. Ltd., P.O. Dii;\ljiygram,
Via: Jirrmgar-361 140
850 GI/12—4
3892 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA^, 1904^ ^ J P A B r n - S B C ^ )]
6. ShiiB.M. Saha,
Engineering Manager, Tata Chemicals Limited, Mtthnpur-361345
7. ShriBhatatsinhjiC. Rop.owntalivos of Lime- Chudasmrrw, Vice-PL osident tono and Dolomite Mine Indian National Ttado Workers,
Union Congress Gujarat Branch, Near Chhaya Octioi Post, Poi bandar.
8. Shri Vasudovbhal Pandya,
Secret aiy, Sovali.a Cement Workers' Union, Sovalii, District Khairn.
9. Miss Ilaben Bhatt Women Representative
SEWA
C/O. Te\tilo]hbourA9iociition, Gaundhi nmjoor sevalaya, Bhadra Post Box No. 110, Ahmadabad.
2. The Welfare Administrator of tho I.imtstone end TJolc- mito Minos Labom Welfare Fund Oiganisation, shall bo the Secretary of the Advisory Committee.
3. Tn tetms of rule 18 of the Llrnestone and Dolomite Mind Labour Welfare Fund Rulos 1973, the Central Government hereby fixes Patun to be the he.idquoitois of the spid Advisoiy Committee.
[F. No. U-23018/17/80-M.V.J
T.D. SALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ORDER
New Delhi, the 5th October, 1982
S.O. 3687.—Whereas the industrial dispute specified in the Schedule hereto annexed is pending before Shri Mool Chund Bhardwaj, the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Farida- bad;
And whereas the services of Shri Mool Chand Bhardwaj cannot be utilised for adjudication of a dispute falling in the Central Sphere for technical reasons;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 33-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby withdraws the proceedings in relation to the said dispute pending before the said Shri Mool Chand Bhardwaj, Presiding Officei. In- dustrial Tribunal, Faridabad and transfers the same to the , Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, New Delhi with the direction that the latter Tribunal shall proceed with the proceedings and dispose of the same accor- ding to law.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the closure of the quarries attached to the Cement Factory of Dulmia Dadrl Cement Ltd., Charkhi Dadri with effect from 18-3-1980 is justi- fied If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled 7" Dadri with, effect from 18-3-1990 is justified. If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled ?"
INo. L-29024/1/81-D. 1JJ. B]
R. P, NARULA, Dy. Secy.
ORDERS
New Delhi, the 14th October, 1982
S.O. 3688-—Whereas a vacancy has accurcd in the Office of the Presiding Officer of (he Labour Court No. 1 at Dhan- bad constituted by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour No. S.O. 1697 dated the 22nd May, 1965.
Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provisions of section 8 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ,(14 of 1947), the Cential Government hereby appoints Shri Manoranjan Prasad, as the Presiding Officer of the said Labour Court with effect from tho 4th October, 1982.
LNo. S-11020(3)/82-D.T.(A)(i)]
3893
S.O. 3689,—Whereas a vacancy has occurred in the Office of the Presiding Officer of the Industrial Tribunal No. 1 at Dhanbad constituted by the notification of the Govern- ment of India in the Ministry of Labour No, S,O. 103 dated the 11th January, 1960;
Now therefore, in pursuance of the provisions of section 8 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri MHnoranjan Prasad, as the Presiding Officer of the Industrial Tribunal, with effect from the 4th October, 1982.
[No. S-ll020(3)/82-D.I(AXii)]
L. K. NARAYANAN, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 14th October, 19"2
S.O. 3690.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal No. 3, Dhanbad in the industrial dispute between the employers to the management of North Tisra Colliery of Messrs Bharot Coking Coal Limited, Post Office Khas Jeenagora, District Dhanbad and their workmen, which was, received by the Central Government on the Hth October, 1982.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRI- BUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT No. 3, DHANBAD
Reference No. 4/80
PRESENT:
Shri J. N. Singh, Presiding Officer.
PARTIES:
Employers in relation to the management of North Tisra Colliery of M|s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., P. O. Khas Jeenagora, Dist. Dhanbad.
AND
Their workmen.
APPEARANCES :
For the Employers—Shri B. Joshi, Advocate.
For the Workman—Shri S. Bose, Secretary, R.C.M.S.
INDUSTRY : Coal STATE : Bihar
Dated, the 4th October, 1982
AWARD
The Govt. of India in the Ministry of T abour in exercise of the powers conferred on them U /s 10(l)(d) of the In- dustrial Disputes Act. 14 of 1947 has referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication under Order No. L-20012] 153|79-D.III(A) dated 15th January' 80.
SCHEDULE
"Keeping in view the functions performed by Shri Mahesh Tiwary, Attendance CI"rk of North Tisra Colliery of M|s. BLarut Coking Coal Ltd., P. O. Khas Jeenagora, DLt. Dhanbad whether the de- mand of tbc workmtn that hj should be placed in Grade-1 'Clerical) is justified '.' If so, to what ixlicL is the iuid workmen entitled ?"
2. According to the wuikman he is a peimanent emp- loyee of the collieiy since 1-1-1946 und was initially work- ing us an Attendance Clerk buj subsequently he was work- ing us Suifucc-in-Charijc whi.h post ho is holding since the time uf the take ovci i>f the management by the Govt. It ii stated thai prim to take ovci he was being paid wages of Clerk Guide II by the pnvtttc owners but lifter nationali- sation inspite of the fact that he is performing the duties of Clerical Grade I, he is being paid the wages of Clerk Grade II.
3. It is alleged that the concerned workman represented his case before the management and he was also ossurred rectification of his defective fitment in pay scale but nothing was done. It is alleged that the Collery Manager in April, 1977 assigned as many as nine additional duties to the con- cerned workman which ho has been performing and he is doing the duties of Suiface-i"Ch,irgc and not of an Atten dance Clerk It is submitted that the concerned Workman has been denied his propei grade of scale of pay ;md, h suffer- ring serious financial loss. The concerned workman, having failed to receive justice m the hands of the management raised an industrial dispute and after failure of conciliation the present jefeiunce was made. Tt is submitted that the concerned workman should be paid the scale of pay in Cleri- cal Grade I in view of his performance of duty as Surface- in- Charge since the date of tnke over and his demand is justified.
4. According to the management, however, the concerned workman Sri Mahesh Tiwary was us Attendance Clerk prior lo take over and he had been coirectly fi\cd in clerical Riadc II and his demand to be fixed in clerical grade F is not justi- fied. Tt is stated that considering the output of the collicrv nnd the miscellanceous surface -works connected with and incidental to loading nnd despatch of coal and coke, one R.P. Singh has been posted as Supervisor to perform all the supervisory jobs and he has been placed in Technical Supe- rvisory Grade 'A' of the Coal Wage Board recommendation. It is submitted that the concerned workman docs not supervi- se or control or direct the mannual or clerical workers enga- ged on surface jobs and so his assertion that he is n Svirfacc- in-Charge has no merit at till. Tho main function of the concerned workman according to the management is the clerical jobs of maintenance of records and it is stated that the concerned workman is performing the various clerical iobs as a general clerk and that hi? crse for promotion to clerical frade I will be considered when there will be a san- ction for such a post on the surface of the colliery. Tt is futther stated that there does not e.^ist nny post of Purfiw-in-CharRe tinier tbc Wags Board recommendation and the colliery in general do not have any person known as Surfato-in-Charg*.
5 On the above grounds it is prayed thpt tht Reference
he decided in favour of the management.
6. The point for consideration is a<- to whether keeping in view the function performed by Sri Mahesh Tewary, Attendance Clerk whether his demand that he should be phced in Grade I (Clerical) is justified, If so, to what relief is the said workman entitled.
7, From the reference its^f it will appear (hat the gn>d- of the concerned workman is to be de- cided keepine in view the 1 unction pirform:d by him, Tt h ndrnitted by the manncement that the concerned work- mrn war an atlendnncc cl^rk prior to tn^r ovci' ,>nd he was plrced h Clcik Grade TT It h nut denied th&i the con- cerned voritman is under employment of the c illiery since 1°4fi an~t since then he is getting the pay scale of ricrk Grade TT The rrnnagc-ment has also asserted tint Ihere i= no post of Snrfa1 Wae? \Teement and so the claim of the roncemej woikman to be placed in Grade T is nnj-'i-.tifi' d. This cont-ntirm of the ™nmpem Mil is how- ever not tenable. It mircht hc that th;rc is no such post under the Coal Wage Board recommendation known us
3894 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, J982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I -S E C. \n)]
Surfaco-in-Charjzc but the documents of the management would themselves so that tho concerned clerk was dcigr.ated W Smfaee ln-CharRe. Ext. W'-l is the identity card IS'IU d to the concerned woikman by the present management Trine his designation has been shown ns Suifacc-in-Chaige The date of appoin'ment is 1-1-1946. Ext, W-2 is a lattc. dat:d 19th/21st Apul, 1977 issued by the Supctintcndent, Noith Tisia Colliery to the concerned woikman. This kllei also shows the designation of the concerned workman .T. Suriac1- ln-Charpe. By this letter the concerned woikman was direc- ed to 'uperviie the jobs us mentioned in tho letter. They are as follows :
1. Loading of T1SCO Truck.
2. Local scale of S|Coke if any
3. Supervision of manufactuimg soft coke in Quality
and quantity.
4. General Supervision of Magazine and maintaining the
main records of the same.
5 Accounting and receipt of Timber.
6. Maintenance of records of bricks.
7. Supervision of the work of casuals.
8. Maintenance of all records as required by ACM. 9. All other jobs as advised by ACM Inchurge.
It is not denied on behalf of the management that the con- cerned workman is not peiroiming all the above jobs. J?ii_ni a persual of the jobs assigned lo tnc woikman it will appear that he was to make supervision of seveial jobs sui.ii as Bupeivision ot manuiactunng ot solt coal in quality and quantity, general supervision of magazine and maurtunuce of main records ot the same, supci vision of the woiks of casuals in addition to the other jobs as mentioned in this letter including local sale of soft coal, loading oi TiiCO Trucks etc.
8. The main duty of attendance clerk, however, is to take attendance only. No attendance register has been hied to show that in tact the concerned clerk was in charge of the attendance. The cocnerned workman has examined himself ag WW-1 and he 1ms stated that he is Surfacc-m-Chaige tvon till today and that he does not do the work ot Atten- dance Clerk.
9. Ext. W.3 is a letter by the management dated 20-3-1979 to the A.L.C., Dhanbad and fiom this letter also it will aopeai that certain othei jobs aie also performed by the concerned workman though the management has said thai these jobs are like that of general Assistant. 1 do not think a General Assistant can be called upon to perform the jobs of supei- visory nature as is mentioned in Ext W-2. No doubt the management has examined MW-1 an Asstt. Coihery Manager who has stated that the main duty of the concerned woikman was prepare the raising repoit on the basis of report of Munshi and that he was also looking after the job of soft coke manu- facturing and looking after the loading of local sale but ho has not denied that the jobs assianad to the concerned work- man in E\t. W-2 are not vtnnrniiid by hm. MW-1 has however stated that one Sri R P. Singh 13 workms as loading Supervisor but this Sri R. P. Singh is thc son of the Ex-owncr of the colliery. It is not denied that the concerned woikman is doing many jobs of supervisory nature. Further it will appear that though the concerned workman is in Ginde II since 1946 but till today he hat not been aiven p'o'-iution. Even according to the cadre scheme of (he management the concerned workman should bv nn.v have been placed in Grade I, more so in face of several supervisory jobs being performed by him.
1ft Thc learned Advocate of the management his drawn ">y attention to the Coal Wajre BoEird recommendation Vol IT rnn— 54 Aopendix VI in which the pradimt nf rlerical staff r.".i Their nomenclatures hive been mentionrd and it h ii'bmitted that under Grade 1 only the departmental h e ds b-ivc been mentioned and (here ig no name of SiT-fncc-in- Cli, /'. This Appendix, however, dn not indicate that only twds of depmtinent have rjcen given uriide I, Fuulivr there way not t>c any pust of oailaLC-in-Liiargj untlci die Coal Wage boaid but fioin the documents ol the management it is cldJi that ihc concerned workman was dcsignmed as iuirace- iii-i_lijige and- he was asked to perloim several sup>-ivi;.ory duties in suth ciicumsLuULLs the action of the management in uot giving ihe pay of Grade 1 clerk to Ihc concerned workman tjiinot be held to be justified In my opinion, and on the evi deuce on rccuid and keeping in view the tunctions performed by thc concerned workman he is entitled to be placed in Grade I Clerical.
11. The next question is a<. to from which date he should be put in Giadc I. Though the concerned woikman has stated that he is doing the job ol Suiiace-m-Chaige since prior to tuke ovei but me claim was made by him in the year 19/8 or iyyy that is alter a lapse of several ycais. )c su.h circum- stances, I think the ends of justice will be met if ihe con- cerned woikman is put m Grade I (Clencal) fiom the date ol Kefe
12. The awaid is given accordingly,
Sd/-
J. N. SINGH, Presiding Officer.
[No. L-20012U53j/7y.D.UI.
SO. 3631.—In puisuanee of section 17 of tho Indus'rial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cential Government heieby publishes the following award of the Cential Govern- ment Industrial Tubunal No. 3, Dbaubad in the industrial dispute between the employe is in relation to the management uf Miifjma Aiea of Messrs Eastern Coalfields J.united, Post OIHLC Mugma, District Dhanbacl, and their workmen, which was tei_uved by ue Ceritral Goveinment on the 11th October 1982.
BiFORF THfc CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL 1RIBUNAL-CUM LABOUR COURT NO. 3, DHANHAD
Refereuce No. 25/80
PRESENT :
S'hn I. N Singh, Presiding Otflcar.
PARTIES :
Employers in relalion to the management of Mugma
Aiea of M/s eastern Coalfields l t d. P.O Magma Dm. Dhanbad.
AND
Their workmen
APPEAR\NCE4 .
For the Employers—Jihri R. 5. Murthy, Advocate
For tho Workmen—None,
INDUSTRY : Coal. STATE : Bihar
Dated, the 4th October, 1982
AWARD
The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them u/s. lCMXd) of Lhc Industrial Disputes Act, 14 of 1947 has referred the d sp'ite tn this Tribunal for adjudication under Order No I 20012 /219/79-D.1II.A, dated the 17th April '80.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the demand of the workmen of Mugma Area of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd., P.O Mucma, Dist Dhanbad that the workmen mentioned in Annt'xurc A should be regularised a<; normanen: employers of th- Collicrv and that thev chould be eiven v/ngca in accordance with Ihe National Conl WnRe Agreement with retrospective effect is justified? Tf no, to what
relief are the said workmen entitled ?"
3895
ANMLXURE—A
Date of Apptt,
Q'wlification
DujUjiutiun
Namo
Rate pay per
Tyiuat Gua. (1 Gan d Guaid Gm d GLUI d Us kAcct. Dptt Wulk Ml3tiy
Mati ic N on-Mat Ac Mat: ic N^n-Mat. B.A. Non-Mat. B.A. HS.S Non-Mdt. B.A.
9.63 7.70 7.70 7.70 7.70 7.70 9.63 9.63 9.63 9.63
7-4-1976 -do- 20-8-1976 17-8-1976 7-44970 21-8-1976 2-5-1976 3-b-1976 3-11-1976 1-12-1976
-do- -do-
S l ShoJ Sruukft. Pdiidoy „ Uma Slu.uk;!. P. iUoy ,, HauaaiiLinL.ii Pandoy „ (jh^nihyai I MHi a „ JS
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. lO.
(1) Thai, both the paities have jointly negotiated thii matter with a vie.v to coming to u mutually agreed over-all settlement.
2. On 20-9-1982 both die parties have filed a joint peti- tion ol cumpi oimse duly signed on their behalf ana they piay ih
3. I have gone through the settlement which is bcnelkial
tor the workmen.
4. In the c-ncumslances the uwaid is passed in teims of
(2) That as a result of the said joint negotiations, both the panics have come to ovei-all agrcemeni for the settlement of .his matter on the following terms and conditions :—
the settlement which skill toiin ptnt of the award. hue : Settlement.
Terms & Conditions
J, N. SINGH, Presiding Ufficct
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVl'KNJVlF.Nl INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 3, DdANUAD In the inattei of reference No. 25 of 198U
PARTIES :
(a; Agreed that since one of the 10 workmen concerned in this dispute, namely Sn Surendia Singh, hat wince cxpiied, the workmen will drop his case and there will be no claim whatsoever in respect of the said Sri Surtndia Singh.
Kmployeis in relation to the Management of Mugma
Area of Eastern Coalfields Ltd.
AND Their Workmen
The above mentioned stnployiMS und the woikmeh jointly
beg to submit as follows :—
(b) Agreed that the remainmg nine workmen hbve aheady been regularised by the Management with effect from 1-1-1980 as per details mentioned in the chart given below and that they are being paid wages etc. as per NOWA-II as from that date:—
Nauu
Smco woiking & designation Rogulansod w.o f 1-1-1S80 SI N>
in tho post of
1. 2
. . . . . . ..
5".
7-4-76 Typist 3-5-76 Atctts. Clork 7-4-76 Gua d 2-6-76 Woik Supvi.
Stoonogra pher Claiica.1 Gr-I Clerks G ade-II Gua d—Monthly Grndo-G Wo.k Mjstiy—Monthly Gi-I
-do- -do-
.
,
Sn S S. P j i i u oy S 1 N i C . P. V a r . ui 5> I N K. di i,_-,ii a il S u b a aj U J W . II Sri il.c. ivn.li. S i G j . M i . hi b ii A S. R ' l i u Oy . . . . . . .. j i U .J P J. i u i )y . .. j ri B 1 u i ki O j h ti . .
. . . ..
4, 5. 0. 7. H. 9
1-1Z-76 -do- 17-S-76 Gua d 20-8-76 Gua d 7-4-76 Guaid 21-8-76 Gua.d
Gua d-Monthly Grade G -do- Grtde-G -do- Giade-G -do- Giade-G
[c) Agreed that the nine workmen rtftni-d to above !iie not ciLiitied LO -ny tuiinci beneiit loi th<; paiiod on and ulier l-l-li"8U as they aie gcuing trom ihdt date the buQelits lmd dj\/n m M WA Ii.
in service and also fi>r the purpose of gratuity, (h; Agiecd that the P.W. Case No. 2 of 1980 which ht.s been ii rd by the Labour Enforcement OffLer (Central), Chhkunda bufoii .he Bokaro Labour Court and which is pending before that Court, shall be deemed to have been withdrawn and a copy of thiN compromise petition will be forwarded jointly by the paitles to the Regignal Labour Commis- sioner (Cential), Dhanbad, the Conciliation Officer A.L.C.(C), Dhanbad and also the Labour Enforcc- mentment Officer (C), Chlrkunda, (.d) Ag.ccd that the n>Ui uonuneD rueirjl to nlo\e will be paid ifis dtfivicme ui wages between wliai. they acLually ha^ a.iCK'y betn paii and what is admissible to Cat-I workers undei NCWA-I tor the period between their date of appointment and 31-12-1978 and between what thtjy have al- ready been paid anj what is admissible to f at I workois under NCWA-II for the peiiod 1-1-1979 to 21-8-1979 irrespective of the job/jobs peifomed by them.
(i) Agreed that capy of thin settlement shall also be filed jointly by both the parties before the Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City, praying for disposal of the case pending before him in terms of this settlement.
(c) Agreed that since the nine woikmcn concerned have been paid wufios as per NCWA-U for the period 22-S-1979 & 3M2-1979 nccotding ;o the jobs _ ycnnin ed by them as rjtml workmen, nothing more will bo payable to them for this period.
(3) That since the parties consider that this settlement is fair and leasonable, the same may kindly be nrrrpted and an award may be given in terms thereof.
Both the parties jointly pray accordingly.
Y. R. MANDLOT, Personnel Manager.
Nirsa Area (f) Agreed that the nine workmen referred to above will be entitled to earned leave wages as per the piovisions of ihe Mines Act and Mines Krles nnd the rules of Eastern Coalfields I imited appli- cable to casual employees.
Eastern Coalfields Limited, authorised representative (g) Agreed that the dates of appointment of nil the nine workmen conevred shall be icckoncd fr ><" the date they arc actually wrrking fs fndi ated under clause (b) above for the purpose of smioi Iv
of employers for & on behalf of employer!.
Sd/-
3896 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PAKT I I- SEC. 3(ii)]
For & on behalf of workmen (1) Sri Balmiki Ojha (2) Sri Rama Shankar Pandev (3) Sri Ram Chandra Mishra (4) Sri Ghanshyam Mishra (5) Sri Nawal Kishore Singh (6) Sri Nawal Kishore Prasad Vernift (7) Sri Subhas Goswami (8) Sri Uma Shankar Pauday (9) Sri Sheo Shanknr Pandey
Dated : 20th September, 19S2.
[No. L-20012/219/79-D.lJKAn
A. V. S. SARMA, Desk Officer.
period of five years from the date of publication of this. Notification in the official Gazette, the provisions of Sec- tions 12, 13, 14 and 18 of the saij AU shall not npply to railway servants who are on time scales of pay approved by the Cential Government and governed by the provisions of Chapter VIA of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 (9 of 1890) and the Indian Railways Establishment (JoJe and who are employed in any scheduled employment in Railways.
[No. S. 32014/2/82-WC(MW)l
M. L. MEHTA, Undci Secy.
New Delhi, the 18th October, 1982
S,O. 3693.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of t*ie Central Govern- ment Indushial Tribunal, Calcutta in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Bombay and their wolkmen, which was received by the Central Government on (he 12th October, 1982.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA
Reference No. 93 of 1980
New Delhi, the 16th October, 1982
S.O. 3692.—The following draft of a notification whfch the Central Government proposes to make in exercise of tho powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 26 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (11 of 1948) is hereby published for the information of all persons likely to be uffected thereby and notice is hereby given that the jaid drnft will be taken into consideration on or after the expiry of two months fiom the date of publication of this notification jri the official Gazette.
Any objections or suggestions which may be received from any person in respect of the said drfft, before the expiry of the said period of two months, will lje considered by the Central Government.
DRAFT NOTIFICATION
In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 26 of ihe Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (11 of 1948) the Central Government hereby directs that for a PARTIES:
The Management of New India Assurance Company Limited, Bombay in i elation to their Division Office at Calcutta.
AND
Their Workmen.
PRESENT :
Mr. Justice M, P. Singh, Presiding Officer.-
APPEARANCES:
On behalf of Management—Mr. T. N. Mullick, Advocate,
On behalf of Workmen -Mr. Anil Das Choudhury, Advocate,
STATE : West Bengal. INDUSTRY": Insurance.
AWARD
By its Order No. L-17012
"Whether the action of the management of New India Assurance Company Limited, Mahal ma Gandhi Road, Fort, Bombay in terminating the services of Sri Ashim Kumar Ghosh, Development Inspector, Calcutta Unit, with effect from the 27th March, 1976 is legal and justified 7 If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled 7"
2. The management has raised a preliminary objection that Sri Ashim Kumar Ghosh was not a workman and hence there being no industrial dispute this reference is not main- tainable. In my opinion the contention is sound.
3. Sri Ghosh was employed as a Development Inspector with function to procure insurance business through Agents. II is well settled that an employee in an industry to be a 'workman' under the definition of workman under Sec. 2
3897
4. Admittedly in the present case Sri Ghosh does not claim to fall in the classification of technical or manual work. In the written statement of the workman in paragraph 6 it it. claimed by the workman that the nature of woik done by Sri Ghosh was mainly supervisor-cum-cleriral, namely, operation of telephone, despatch and feccivinji letters. Befoie this Tribunal, however. Counsel appearing for the workman conceded that the main duty of Sri Ghosh was not clerical. The only question, therefore, s whether the princi- pal and main duty of Sri Ghosh was supervisory. The icope of the e\piession "supervisor" came in for consideration hefore tht: Supreme Court several times. In the Burmah Shell & Oil Storijte and Distribution Company of India Ltd., Madras vs. Their employees, 1954 I LLJ 21, it was held that the employee musl occupy a position of command and direction and should be authorised to ^ct without the sanc- tion of the Manager or other superiors. This view was up- held in Lloyds Bank vs. Pannalal Gupta, 1961 I LLJ 18 in which the Supreme Court observed, '"In considering the later aspect of the pioblem industrial adjudication generally took the M'CW that the supervisor or officer should occupy a position of ef command or decision and should be authorised to act in certain matters within the limits of his authority without the sanction of the manager or other supervisors". The same view was taken in South Tndian Bank v. Chacko, 1964 I LLJ 80 and also in All India Reseive Bank Employees Association and Another vs. Reserve Hjnk of India and Another, 1965 TI LLJ 175. In Government of India and another and C. A, Balakrishnan and another, 1975 II LLJ 301 it was held by the Supreme Court that essence of the supervisory uatu.e of work is (he supervision by one person over (he work of others. Supervision •'.on'errplates direction and contiol. Ordinary supei vision is not ''iipervi.vory1 within the meaning of S. 2(s), If this test as laid down by the Supreme Court decision is to be applied in relation to the Deve- lopment Inspector it will be found that the supervision which he will have over the Agents is not supervisory in the manner in which workmen in an industry are supervised by the Supervisors. The management has Wed several docu- ments (Annexures A to D to their written statement) in order to how that the main or substantial work of Sri Ghosh as an Inspector was procurement of insurance business through Agents. Sii Ghosh has examined himself as WW-1, He has stated in his evidence in chief, "As an Inspector my main works were (i) to look after the works of the agents and sec that they progress in work, (ii) to receive letters regularly and sometimes I used to do the duty of telephone Inspector. I never went to the customers for can- vassing for policy." He has further said that he had no P"wer to take any action against the agents, Tn his crosF- .-rtamination he has said thot there was no agent under him and no agent worked under him Apply the test laid down by the Supreme Court decision above said, it must be held that the main work of Sii Ghosh was to procure insurance business thiough agents and this cannot be called supervisory. Act-ordinft to his evidence he did not occupy a position of command and direction and wns not juthoiised to lake in- dependent decision. Tn this view of the matte- the fact tint Sri Ghosh was gelling less than Rs, 500 as his salary is im- material,
5. Counsel appearing for the management has filed a copy of the decision dated 3rd Febmary, 1978 in tho case of J. P. Mchta & 26 other;, vs. M/s. New India Assurance Company, Bombay which was decided by the Presiding Offi- cer, Central Government Labour Court, Bombay-1 in Older to thow that a Development Inspector of this management was held not to be a workman and tint his function wfii held not to be clericii. The mi-nagemcnt has also filed a copy of another decision in the case of S. K, Verma vs. Zonal Manager Life Insurance Corporation of Tndia decided by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industiial Tri- bunal-cum-Labour Court, New Delhi on 23rd October 1979 It is not necess-arv to discuss these two decislu.m because I have already held on merits that 'the mam or substantial function of Sn Ghosh wns not supervisory. It follows 1hit Sn Ghosh must he held not to be a workman.
6. Apropos my decision is that Sri Aihim Kumar Ghosh h not a workman within the meaning of Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, there is, iher-fore, n0 indu-rtrial dispute and accordingly this reference ii not maintainable.
Dated, Calcutta,
The 25th September, 1982.
M. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
[No. L-17012/ll/80-D.rV(A)J
S.O. 3694.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal, No. 2, Bombay in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to Shri Conceicac Pereira, Onwer of Launch ' Joseph Anselmo", Goa and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 11th October, 1982.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, BOMBAY
PRESENT:
Shri M. A. Deshpande, Presiding Offlcei.
Reference No. CGIT-2|2" of 1982
PARTIES:
Employer in relation to Shri Conceicae Pereira, Owner
of Launch "Joseph Anselmo".
AND
Their Workmen.
APPEARANCES:
For the Employers—No appearance.
For the workmen—No appearance.
INDUSTRY : Ports and Docks. STATE : Goa, Daman & Dlu.
Bombay, the 4th October, 1982
AWARD
By their order No. L-36012(l)/82 D.IV(A) dated 21-5-1982 the Central Government referred the following dispute under Section 10O)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 tor adjudication;—
"Whether the action of Shri Conceicao Pererira, Owner of launch "Joseph Anselrao" in terminating the ser- vices of Shri Chudge Krishna Gaonkar, launch ciew, is justified ? If not, to what relief it the concerned workmen entitled ?"
2. On receipt of the reference notices wero issued to both Ihc workman Shri Chudge Krishna Gaonkar. whose services were alleged to have been wrongfully terminated and the employer Shri Conceicao Percira, Owner of lanch "Jcseph Anselmo". However that repeated notices were iisued and though the workman was told that he need not come to Bombay for filing of statement of claim, on receipt of which the matter will be fixed at Goa as requested, the workman never cared to file the statement of claim, as a result which the employer has also not filed his written statement in reply The r"t result is thnt in the absence of tho statement of claim supporting the reference, despite repeated chances given, the matter cannot be proceeded with and has to be d'sposod of.
Award accordingly.
No order as to costs,
M. A. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer.
Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Bombay.
[No. L-36012|l|32-D. IV
T. B. SLTARAMAN, Desk Officer
3898 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I - S E C. 3(ii)]
New Delh, the 11th October, 1982
S.O. 3695.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Bombay, in the industrial dispute between the employers In relation to the management of Union Bank of India, Bombay and (heir workmen, which was received by the Central Government on the 29-9-82.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, BOMBAY
The paities, therefore, pray that this Honourable Tribunal be pleased to take the said Settlement on record und be ploa cd to make an Award in terms thereof and dispute off the Reference accordingly.
Dated this 7th day of September, 1982.
(M. S. Udeshi),
(Shri G. S. Nhavi I,
Advocate for Woiknian. Workman : bove Mined.
(Firoze Darasha Damania),
Advocate for Union Bank of India.
Reference Nos. CGIT-2/10, 11, 12 and 28 of 1981
PARTIES:
Employers in relation to the management of Union Bank
of India.
AND
Their Workmen.
APPEARANCES:
For the employers—Shri F. D. Damania, Advocate.
For the workmen—Shri M. S. Udeshi, Advocate.
INDUSTRY: Banking. STATE: Maharashtra.
Bombay, tho 7th September, 1982
AWARD
(Dictated in the Open Court)
All these references though pertaining to different emp- loyees involve similar facrs regarding Ihe termination of the service, against which termination, disputes have been raised and ultimately referred to this Tiibim.il for adjudication under Section lOOXd) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1047 bv crrl;i No. I-12012/221/80-DII.A dated 30-7-19SL, No. L-12012/ 219180-D.II.A dated 30-7-1981 No. L-12012/215/SO-D H.A dated 30-7-1981 and No. L-12012/214/80-D.II.A doled 26th October, 1981.
2. The matter was initially contested on behalf of the Respondent namely the Union Bank of India, However now the parlies have arrived nt settlement whereby ull these emp- loyees have been reinstated and in fact they joined the duties. I am told, since yesterday and secondly the Union Bank of India was good enough to giant continuity of service without any break and only restriction was that these employees are to get back wages not from the date of termination but from 1-4-1981. On going throush the term* of settlement and also on going through the benefits received by the work- men T am convince^ that the condition regarding the back wages is also fair and since (he terms of settlement are fair, just and proper, the award in terms of settlement in all the references shall be passed.
No order as to costi.
M. A. DESHPANDE, Presiding Officer.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL AT BOMBAY
Reference CGIT No. 2/10 of 1981
Shri G. S, Nhavi—Workman.
V / B.
Union Bank of India—Employer.
MAY IT PLEASE THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL
The workman and the Employer have ariived at a settle- ment in respect of the dispute referred to this Honourable Tribunal for adjudication.
The said settlement is fair and proper and is acceptable
to both the parties.
For Union Bank of India Sdl- SuperintenuenL
BEFORE THE CETRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL A 1 BOMBAY
Reference C.G.LT. No. 2/10 of 1981
Shri G. S. Nhavi—Workman.
V/s.
Union Bank of India—Employer.
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
With a view to resolve the dispute amicably and as a gesture of goodwill Union Bank of India (heicin. Her letuied to as 'the Bank') agice to rcinsLate Srtm G. S. Nhavi (herein- after refened to as the 'workman') in the Bank's employ- ment with continuity of service from 10th April, 1974. He will report to the Superintendent, Department of Personnel, Mctrolopitan Bombay Zone at Central Office, Bombay for allotment of duty on 6th September, 1982.
2. By way of all amounts payable to him for the period fiom 10th Apiil, 1974 to 5th September, 19R2 either by way of wages/leave wjgcs/bonus/ct-flralij payment or other allowance, peiquisites and jinvikis;es, the Bank .tgieea to pay tho workman and the said woikman agices to receive in full and final settlement thereof the sum of Rs. 13,475 05 being backwages payable fioin 1st April, 1981 till 5th Sept., 1982 after deducting income tax, if any, and Provident Fund on the said amount of backwrtges.
3. The workman agrees that the Provident Fund loan out- standing of Rs 342.00 be dcdirtc 1 fiom the amount of Rs. 13,475.05 arrived at in Clause 2 above.
4. The workman does hereby give up his claim for back-
wages from 10th Apiil, 1974 to 31st March, 198).
5. The employer agrees tint although the workman will not be entitled to backw.igcs fiom 10th April, 1974 to 31st March, 1981 the aforesaid peiiod fiom 10th April, 1974 till 5th September, 1982 shall be computed to bc conjide-cd for the purpose of gratuity, seniority, promotion, fitment with the usual annual increments subject to the rules and regula- tions prevalent in that behalf.
6. As desired by the workman, the employer has paid to thf workman at the time of fllink the piesent consent terms, the unflrrmentioned sum payable as airivcd at in Clause 3 above, by nny o'der favouritm thi workman''; Bdvnr- \te on record in the t>bovf matter viz Shii M. S. Udeshi, bearing No. 043225 dated 2rul September, 1982 for Rs, 13,133 05 drawn on Bombay Main Office (Naiiman Point).
7. Though for the purpose of making payment, the Ba^k has agreed to pay and the workman has agreed to receive woges fiom 1st April, 1981 to 5th SepVrnher, 1982 as aforesaid and though it is further agreed that the wotkrpan will rcnort on 6th September, 1982 but for the purpose of deduction of income-tax, if anv, and the workman's contrl- bnt'on towards Provident Fund and also for credit of pri- vilege leswe, rasual leave and sick leave thf Pink ac -e<- to treat the workman on dntv from 1st April J9K1 an^ deductions will he made anrl 1eivc credi+cd as !f the wrrk- man was in employment from the mid date. It is further clarified that the workman is deemed to have enjoyed and exhausted all leave upto 31st March, 1981.
3899
The partie* agree to bear their own cost of the Referenco
Proceedings.
DatLd, At Bombay this 4tb day of September, 1982.
[}l, S. Udeshi),
(Shn G. S. Nhavi),
Ad\ocatv for Workman Woikman abovenamed.
hot Union Hank of Ind .i M K. UmJrruihesvwriin, 3. Tho workman agrws that tho provident fund amount of Rs. 4408.20 vide cheque No. 159053 dated 25Ui February, 1977 collected by him be deducted from the amount of k& 15671.80 arrived at in clause 2 above.
4. The workman does hereby give up his claim for back-
v.agcs lrom 5ih November, 1976 to 31st March, 1981.
Supcumendtnt
Firoze Darsha Damanln,
Athoeale for the
Umun Hank of India.
BD OPX 'iHE CENTR \L OOVFRNMTNT [NBUMRIAI- TRIBUNAL AT" BOMPW
Rtfurcnti' CGET No. 2/11 o° 1981
Shn J S. Watheln—Workra in.
V/s.
Union Bank of Indi.i- Employer
MA"' IT PLFASE THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL
The workman end the Employer have ainved .it a sett's: - in nt in respect of the disnute referred to this HonouialU fnbiirnl foi adjiid'cation.
TV -aid settlement is fail and rioper and is acceptable
to both ;Jio parties.
The parties, th:iefoie. p aye that 'hifi Honourable Trihunal bi pleased To tak? Ihc said SctllcTipnt on record a d t~e pleased la make an Award in Idrn^ theieof an.1 d' pvi off ih^ U:f-icn^c j co t-Jiigly
H-'id this, 7*h dav (if Sen|;nl-cr 10S3
fSliri J. S. \\\>phck>).
Woikman abovcrMroed
I MS Udeshi),
'i Ivncpte fo, Woikman.
For Union Bank at India.
SuDciinlcndciK,
([ i ozc Darasha Damania),
Advocate foi Union Bank of Inch i
BLFORE TILE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL AT BOMBAY
Rif.rcr".e. C.G.I.T. No. 2|1981
Shu J S Waghela—Workman
Union H.nk of Irul'a—tmployer
Terms of Selt'envnt
With a v.cw lo r.soU; the dispute amicably ind rs a gestuic of guoduirl I ion llanl; of India (he'einaf er ufe,r;J to LS 'ihc Uank'j ., i :" lo Kin,'ale Phij J ^. W,ij e J (iiL'remaflf r icfcr^'d to as 'lh- v.nikman') in thi Bimk\ i nip!u>ment wilh Lontinuitv of SLIVICC fiom ^lh Nnumb.r 1V76 lie v^ill icoort to Ihe Si'P^iin'tndciu, Dcpaitmeni of lJc soniel, M. K /one at ( entral Office, Bombay foi allot- ment Di duty on 6th September, 1982.
2. By way of all amounts pa\able to him for the pcrloJ fiom 5th Nirtembtr, 1976 to 5,h September, 1982 cilher hy way of wr^cs/Itavc wages/botius/ cx-iiratia pa\ment or other allowances, prcqiusitcs and privilKgjs, the Dank agrees to pay the workmen and the said workman ajjree-i (o receive in full and fmal settlement thereof, tho sum of Rs H671 80 bewe; b^okvv fr>, n^v-bl? from 1st Ainl, 19S1 till 5th September,' 19' i ?r - rf-duotins income-tix and provident fond contri- hntrnn on ihc w'd amount of backwaecs.
850 01/^.2—1
5. The employer agrees that although the woikman will not bo entitled to badewages from 5th November. 1976 to 31st March, 1981 the afoicsaid pcnod from 5th November, iy/6 till 5Ji Hwsptcmbei, 1982 shall be considered for the pmpoie of gralu.ty, ienunty, piomotion, iitment with the u=ual annual incicments sub)cct to ,the rulca and xeculations prevalent in that behalf.
f> As dcsiicd by the workman, the tmployer has paid to th^ v,oikman at the time of lilina the present consent terms, the undei-inentioncd sura pjivaWe as anived at in clause 3 abovL', by pay order tavou.i.ig the woikman's advocate on tec.ird, in the above martor viz. Shii M S. Udeshi. bearing ]Jo 0432?.6 aatcd 2-9-82 for Rs 11263.60 drawn on Bomabv K'am Office (Nauman Point).
7. Though for the purpose of making payment, the Bank his agiced to pay and Ihs woikman has a/jiccd to leceive wngis from April, 19S1 to 5th September, 19K2 as oforesaid rnd t'ioiij.Th it is fuither agrcea that tho workman will report en 5ih September, 1982 but foi the purpose of deduction of ireome-tax if any, and the workman's contribution towarc's P ' vident fund an dalso for credit of piivilcgc leave, casual 1c i\c and tick leave, the Bank agrees to treat the workman cm c'ufy fiom 1st April, 1981 and deductions will be made . n I Ir.ive crjited as if ,'he workman wai in employment frori th** said dntc. It is fui'her clarified that th" workman rs d cmed to have eniovcd and exhausted all leave uijto 31st Maich, 1981.
8 The parlies agree lo bear their own cost of Reference
Proceedings.
D ted. (it Bombay this 4lh day of September, 19S2.
M S. Udeshi, Shri J. S. Waghela,
Advocate for Workman (Workman abovenamed)
For Uniop Bank of India. M. K. UMAMAHESHWARAN, Superintendent.
Firo/c Daisha Damania, A Ivocatc for the Union Bank of India BEI-ORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMFNT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAJ AT BOMBAY R-r^uce CGIT No. 2/12 at 1981
Shii S D Vichare—Woikman.
V/s.
Ljnion Bank of India—Employer.
MA If IT PLEASE THIS HONQUI1ABLE TRIBUNAL
1 he workman and Ihe Employer have arrived at a settle- nit t in lesft'Ct or th: dispute rofened to this Hon'ble Til- bunal for adjudication.
The said settlement is fair and proper and is acceptable to
both the paities.
h: parties, therefoic, prayc that this Hon'blo Tribunal bt pleaded to take the said ticttlemcnt on icoord and b" pl.j,jd to make an awaid m terms thereof and dispose off th- Keleience accordingly.
Dat;d thl-. 7Hi d > of September, 1982,
(M. S. Udeshi),
Advocate for Workman.
(Fnoze Daiasha Damania),
Advocate for Union Bank of India.
(Shri S. D. Vichare), workman abovenamed, For Union Bank of Ind;a Sdl- Superintendent.
3900 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30. 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)J
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT BOMBAY
(Reference i C.G.I.T. No. 2|12 of 1981)
Shri S. D. Vichare.—Workman.
Vs.
Union Bank of India.—Employer.
(TERMS OF SETTLEMENT)
With a view to resolve the dispute amicably and as a gesture of goodwill Union Bank of India (hereinafter re- ferred to as the Bank') agrees to reinstate Slni S. D. Vichare (hereinafter referred to as the workman) in the Bank's employment with continuity of service from 8th November, 1976. He will leport to the Superintendent, Department of Personnel, Metropolitan Bombay Zone, Central Office, Bombay for allotment of duty on 6th September, 1982.
2. By way of all amounts payable to him for the period from 8th November, 1976 to 5th September, 1982 cither bv way of wages/leave wages|bonus[ex-gratia payment or o*her allowances, rerquirites and privileges, the Bank agrees to pay the workman and the said workman agrees to receive in full and final settlement, the mm of Re. 13,039.90 being backwages payable from 1st April, 1981 till 5th September, 1982 after dTduc*ing income-tax, if tiny, and Provident Fund Contribution en the said amount of backwages.
3. The workman agrees that the Provident Fund amount of Ri. 848 03 vide Cheque No 159017 dated 10th January, 1977 rol'fctpd bv him be deducted from the amount of Rs. 13,039.90 arrived at in Clause 2 above.
4. The workman does hereby give up his claim tor backwages from 8th November, 1976 to- 31st March, 1981.
5. The employer agrees that although the workman will not he entitled to backwnges from 8th November, 1976 to 31st March, 1981 the aforesaid period from 8th November, 1976 till 5th Seitcmber, 1982 shall be computed to be considered for the purpose of gratuity, senioritv. promotion, fitment with the usual annual inciements subject to the rules ^nd regulations prevalent in that behalf.
6. As desired by the wokman. the employer has paid to the workman at the time of filing the present consent 'erms, the undermentioned sum payable as arrived at in Clause 3 above, by Pay Order favouring the workman's advocate on record in the above matter viz. Shir M. S, Udeshi, bearing No. 043224 dated 2-9-R2 for Rs. 12,191.87 drawn on Bombay Main Office (Nariman Point).
7. Though for the purpose of making payment, the Bank has agreed to pay and the workman has agreed to receive wages from 1st April, 1981 to 5th September, 1982 as aforesaid and though it is further agreed that the workman will report on 6th September, 1982 but for the purpose of deduction of income-tax, if any, and the workman's con- tribution towards Provident Fund and also for credit of privilege leave, casual leave and sick leave, the Bank agrees to treat the workman on duty from lit April 1981 n"d dediutioni will be made and leave credited as if the work- man was in employment from the said date. It is further clarified that the workman k deemed to have enjoyed and exhausted all leave upto 31st March, 1981.
The parties agree to bear their own cost of the Reference
Proceedings
Dated at Bombay, the 4th day of September, 1982
M. S. Udeshi S. D. Vicbare
Advocate for workman. (Workman above rnmed)
Firoz Darasha Damania For Union Bank of India
Advocate for the Union Bank of India. Superintendent, BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT BOMBAY
(Reference i C.G.I.T. No. 2128 of 1981)
Shri S. K. Kunder.—Workman.
V/s.
Union Bank of India.—Employer.
MAY IT PLEASE THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL
The workman and the Employer have arrived at a tettle- ment in respect of the dispute referred to this Honourable Tribunal for adjudication.
The said settlement is fair and proper end is acceptable
to both the parties.
The parties, therefore, prny that this Honourable Tribunal be pleased to take the said Settlement on record and be pleased to make an Award in terms thereof and diipose off the Reference accordingly.
Dated this 7th day of September, 1982
M. S. Udeshi Advocate for Workman. Firozc Dnrasha Damania Advocate for Union Bank jf India.
Shri S- K. Knnder Workman above nnmed For Union Tlnnk of India Sd/- Illegible
Superintendent
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVFRNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT BOMBAY
Reference CGIT No- 2/28 of 1981
Shri S. K. Kunder
...Workman
V/s.
Union Bank of India
. .. Employer
TERMS OF SETTLEMENT
With a view to resolve the dispute amicably and as a gesture of goodwill ^Jnion Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank') agrees to reinstate Shri S. K, Kunder (heie- inafter refcred to ns 'the workman') in the Bank's employ- ment with continuity of service from 27ih November, 1976. He will report to the Superintendent, Department of Per- sonnel, M. B. Zone at Central Office, Bombiy for allotment of duty on 6th September, 1982.
2. By way of all amounts payable lo him for the period from 27th November, 1976 to 5th September, 1982 either by way of wages/leave wrg;s/bonus/ex-grnth payment or other allowances, piequisitcs and privpeges, the Bank agree* to pay the workman and the said workrmn agrees to leceive in full and final settlement, the ^um of Rs. 15.716 90 being back wattes payable from 1st A">ril, 1981 till 5ih Septem- ber, 1982 after deducting income t,ix, if any prU provident fund on the said amount of backwages.
3. The workman agrees that the provident fund amount of Rs 3907.25 vide checiue No. 150004 doted Ihc 27!h Dccen> ber, 1976 collected by him be deducted from the amount of Rs. 15,716.90 arrived at in cl-usc 2 above.
4. The workman does hereby give up ci'iiin for back wage1;
from 27lh November, 1976 to 31st March. 1981.
5. The employer agiees that although tho workman will not be entitled to back wages from 27th November, 1976 to 31-st March, 1981 the aforesaid period from 27lh Novem- ber, 1976 till 5th September. 1982 shall be computed to be considered for the purpose of'grntii'ty seniority, promo'ion fitment with the usunl annunl increments subject to the rules and regulations prevalent in the behalf.
6. As desired by the workman, ihe employer has paid to the workman at the time of filing the present consent terms, the undermentioned sum payable as arrived at in clause 3
3901
above, by pay order favouring the workman's advocate on record in the above matter viz. Shri M. S. Udeshi, bearing No. 043223 dated 2nd August. 1982 for Rs. 11809.65 drawn on Bombay Main Office (Nariman Point).
7. Though the purpose of making payment, the Bank lias agreed to pay and the workman has agreed to receive wages from April, 1981 to 5th September, 1982 M afoiesaid and though it is further agreed that the workman will report on 6th September, 1982 for the puiposc of credit of privilege leave, casual leave and sick leave, the Bank agrees to treat the workman on duty from 1st April, 1931 and deductions will be made and leave credited as if the workman WLD in employment from the said date. It is furMicr clarified th-ot the wo-kman is deemed to have enjoyed and exhausted all leave upto 31st Mutch, 1981.
The parties agree to bear their own cost of the Reference
Proceedings.
Dated at Bombay this 4ih day of September, 1982.
(M. S. UDESHI) Advo ate for Workman (FIR02E DARASHA DAMANJLA) Advccatc fot the Union Bank of India.
SHRI S. L. KUNDER (Workman aboven.imed)
[No. L-12O12(215)/8O-D.1I(A)]
New Delhi, tho 12th October, 1982
S.O. 3696.—In pursuance of section 17 of tne Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Bombay in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of Maharashtra Punc, and their workman which was received by the Central Government on the 5-10-82.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, BOMBAY CAMP : PUNE
PRESENT :
Shri M. A. Deshpande, PrcsidinR Officer.
Reference No. CGIT-2|14 of 1982
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the Management of B?nk of
Maharashtra.
AND
Their Workmen
APPEARANCES:
For the Employers—Snn D. J. Bhanage, Bank Officer.
For thc workmen—Shri R. D. log, President, Bank
Karmachan Sanah, Pune.
rNDUSTRY : Banking S T A TE : Maharashtra
Punc, dated the 17th September, 1982
AWARD
(Dictated in the open Counj
T
U^ ™ .e t^c en t bc B a nk a nd t hc empiovees Ma h vB v^ \ 7d'S p & ?r d er No. ^l2012(l29)/31-n.mA) dated 19-2-1982 under Section JOflXd) of the Industrial Dispute. Act, 1947 the schedule referred for adjudication ii as follows :—
"Whether the action of the management of the Bank of Maharashtra, Punc, In removing Shri S. D, Ws"h r>°3Vrw pOit Of t e! ?x °WBtor with dfect from 12-9-80 to accommodate Shri Y. R. Kolhatkar in the po&L, is justified '.' If not, to what reliet is anri Wajjh entitled V"
2, iyince all the facu aro aloiosi aamitted and there is no fact wniLii is in dispute, 1 shall bi reltumn lo tnc vanous events in chionologiwl older it.' as to imow iifihi on Ju leai point in controversy, so lar as inu BanK oi ivianaiakhua is cunusineii Uwe are two jiank oilices in hune n.nii.iy Uivi^iuiiai uniu: i_uy Division, uiid uiviiiu...ii OJULI; iu.ni uiv^sion. I he leund sixaks tUat bhu i\.ui.iiailvji was. ap- pointed as a Clerk, in ino Divisional ulli^e KUiul .Division on iy-1-.U/u wmie i nn Wdgh w^s appointed ua a u e it m the umsion.il Ollice ci.y Division ou ll-i-\))i\. AvihJnd tuin out on ihe question ot appointment in a particular tuvj- iional omw;. so lar as the cnuy in tUe Bank &civices i" i-oiiccineu evid-ntly n was, ^nu Kojh.iih.ar who joined tne Bant seivice lust and Ihen caiiie Mm Wajjli. t>uoscquen.iy i,(i l-J-19/6 a Zonal oriice was'ciea.etl to wnith OIULC iihii wagti was tiansteiTcd on the iame day on the creation ot ine ollice i.e. on 1-3-1976 as a clerk. Sim Kothatkar huwever, JOUICU the Zonal office on 3-5-iy76, Thsse two dates would be ma- terial because while inter-se scniouty so tar as the Zonal olhce was concerned there arc some tfuidelinca pnscubed on the sttength ot which we •shall have to diueimine wiiLincr m the Zonal oflice it was Shri Wagh or it was ahu Kcilhatkar who could claim seniority amongst the two. The f^ct i" admitted that these transfers to Zonal office horn thi Divi- sional Office, City Division as well as the .Divisional Olfice, Rural Divisional Office, Rural Division respectively were not on their own request but purely on adminisixativa giounu,
3. In the month of May, 1978, test for the post of typist was held tram amongst the members of tlarical daff in the Zonal ollice when it is allied that Sun Wafih v,as found to be having typinfi speed of 49 worJs ptr minute ^HJ S/hri Ko.hatkar's sp;ed ,n typing was 3y words per minuie. Since there was only one post of typist, on 15-3-1978 iihri Wafih was posted as a typist ill the Zonal odice in the re- gular scale with special pay of Rs. 19 plus Dearnew Alluw^n^e on Rs. 19. In other words on 15-5-1978 Shri W.iflh ulaitcd getting something more Aan a Clcik. Since there was ofily one post of typist that loo held by Shii Wafih hi was fietimjj something more than Shri Kolh-Ukar was carryind home a; the end of evciy month.
4. Subsequently in ihe month of Aufiust, 1979 test was held for the post of Telex Operator. Any member of cleri.al staff was ehg^le to appear for the test but he must be atta.hcd to the Zonal office. It wis theiefore not restricted io typisi but was open to the cntiic clerical cadr^ of Ihe Zonal oilier. Now the post of Telex Opeiatoi caines with it normal sea c of Clerical cadre plus Rs. 25 as Special Allowance and Tiear ness Allowance on the said amount which subsequently hns been consolidated at Rs. 78. In other words now a Telex Operator is gettinR his normal clerical scale plus consolidated special allowance of Rs. 78.
5. It is an admitted fact lh.it in ths past Shri Waph as well as Shri Kolhatkar were declared successful. However Shn Wagh was found lo be more proticient as his speed was 78 words per minute and that of Shri Kolhatkuv wag 40 woids per minute. Naturally Shri Wagh wrs round to be more proficient and he could secure the post and accoidingly he was appointed as a Telex Operator cairyng the special allowance for the post on 20-8-1979, in which post he worked upto 11-9-1980.
6. All of a sudden by notice stated to be notice itndei Section 9A bi ihe Industrial Disputes Act dated 20-8-1980 and also by an office order of even date, placinp reliance on circular dated 5-8-1974 Shri V/aHh wai told that his appoint- ment wa9 Irregularly made and that it was Shri Kolhatkar who was really entitled to be appointed as Telex Operator and therefore from 11-9-1980 which was the date Shri Wagh was asked to hand over charge of Telex Operator to Nhri Kolhatkar, is adorning that pout,
7. I was given to understand thnt the mnjority Union was dis-satisfied with the appointment of Shri Wagh and therefore n~d made representation which it seems Weighed, with the Bink and therefore Shri Wagh one fine morning was deprived of his special allowance.
8, On tho strength of these facts and nleadinw the follow- ing issue arise for determination and the findings on thts; '-Mr. depended upon th" question as to who was th" wjibr
3902 THE GAZETTE OF INDI\ : OCTOBER St, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II SEC. 3(ii]
amongst the two who was eligible or better qualified to be appointed as Telex Operator.—
Issues Findings
1. Wether the present dispute is not tenable because it is not an industrial dispute but an individual dispute as contended by the Bank ? Tenable
2. Whether the seniority in joining
ihe Bank affords
3. Whether the seleetion of Telex
Operator is depending upon the seniority alone or it also is depending upon the passing the test ? On pa-sr g of the test
4. If passing of the test iv the
criteria, whether the Union estab- lishes that Shri Wa^h seemed more number of marks than Shri Kalhatkar a4 the time of test 7 """
5. Whether Shri Wagh. is senior or Shri
Kolhatkar according to the prevailing - agreement, regulations etc.? Shri Wagh there was any exception created b> tie p.rig.aphs following ths tionnal rule would be that thu eniority would be depended upon the seniority in the Rr.m:'\ Pidsicaal Office o- Cc-.tr 1 Cffi e It ;- c c n a ' u. '-J h-t-> ;ie P'~i cs that Zonal Office shall be OCE idoie i fs C c : .l O]E;xs and if this ru'e i applied there should pot be any f>pe of ex; p- tioa crep'ed It is Shri Wa~h MIM W, Lan *er ed 'o the 7c"-i' Office cv 1-VI976 \\uo 'hail ie d e'red t~> b? senior to Shri Kolhatkar ?,ro was <-:nfc ed to Zom' CHice on 3 - 5 - 1 9 7 6. It is t he r i i c u l ar ff t he E • n V. i ts K W H J 'I is
laid down, th' "aij rule end rc PIISP'IV i v'i;ated trn "eii'c- rity of Shri Wi>gh in the Zoni,l Ofiicc would tv teyonJ cry dispute.
3903
fault but is was a consequence of the action of the manage- ment. 'Hence my findings on the issues are ;—
(i) Initially th?re was an attempt on the part of the Bank to attack the dispute as individual dispute but since the di'pute has be.-n espoused by the Union registered having ;ignjficant following, which fact is not disputed, the individual dispute is conceited inlo ;in miusliial dispute, Hence the refcjcnce is tenable and legal. Finding on Point No, 1 i\ accoidingly.
(ii) Issue No. 2.—It is the leniniity in joining the parti- cular branch in the present case the Zonal Office •would be the criterion of scnioi ity-lnter-se between various individuals.
(iii) Point No. 3.—As the fuels indicated that it was not the icnio;ity alone which was the ban's for selection of Telex Operator but it was also depend- ed on passing of the test and therefore depended upnn the proficiency displayed by a particular can- didate.
(iv) Issue No. 4.—It is an admitted fact that in the test held for the post of Telex Operator it was Shi i Wagh who succeeded in the test. My finding on issue No. 4 is accordingly.
(v) If the relevant circular of 1974 is Lhc cri'eria, it is Slui Wagh who is senior in the Zonal Office. Find- ing on issue v is accordingly made.
(vi) As 1 have already indicated by resorting to Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act the Bank could not have deprived Shri Wagh ol the post of Telex Operator. It was not because any change is brought in but an exception has been created in the cpfe of Shri Wagh. The Bank is not entitled to give notice under Section 9A to take away the special allowance of Telex Operator. My finding on issue vi is accordingly made.
(vii) In the light of the above discussions the action of the Bank in removing Shri Wagh from the post of Telex Operator cannot be said to be justified. The Bank there/fte, shall re-post Shri Wat;h as a Telex Operator or for one reason or othir the Hank is- not ;n r "'lr,ition to do so, r'ght f:um 11-9-1980 the Bank 'hall continue to pay the social allow- ance pail to thnt pest at the rate declared till the time he i1 lcjrllj transferred from the sr.id office.
BEFORE THIRU T. SUDARSANAM DANIEL, B.A., B.L. Presiding Officer,
Industrial Iribnnal, Tamil Nadu, Madras
(.Conttiluted bv the Government of India)
Wednesday, the 29th day of September, 1982
Ii.JiKiiiJl Dispute No. 43 of J974
[!n the matter of the dispulc toi adjudication under Section 10(1 )(d) of the lndus.lri.il Disputes Act, 1947 between the workman arid the Management ci State Bank of India, Mnt'iits.)
BETWEEN
Thini P. Muihukii.shn'n, Ni. 4, Scshach.-iln Mudaly
St.eet, Saidapct, Madras-15.
AND
The Secietmy and TiiMUirer, State Bank of India, Local
Head Office, First Line Beach, Madras..
RLH.-RFNCE :
Order No. 1, 12012/156/73-LR.UI, dated 15tn Novem- ber, 1974 of the Ministry of Labour, Government of India, New Delhi.
This dispute after having been remanded hy the High Couil in W.A. Nos. 524 of 1979 and 680 of 1979, coming on for final hearing on Monday, the 27th day of September, 1982 upon porusjrifj trie reference, claim and counter state- ment and all other material papers on recoid and upon healing the arguments of Thiru A. Ramachandran for Thiru- valarg'il Row and Reddy, Advocates appearing for the worker end °f Thiru S.injny M'ohnn for King and Partridge, Advo- cates : ppearing for the Management and this dispute having slood over till this day for consideration, this Tribunal made the following.
AWARD
This is an Industrial Dispute between the workman and Man 'ficment of State Bank of India, Madras referred to me un lei Si: tion 7A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication unJsr Section 10(l)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 hy Ihe Government of India in Order No. L-12012/ 15f)/73-IR.Ill,-dated 15-11-1974 of the Ministry of Labour, in lespect of (he following schedule : •
15. Payment of '-— ^cT-iI I'lowanre from 11-9-1980 \
3904 THE G\ZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBLR 30, 1982/KART1KA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(he years 1966 and 1967, and they were acts of gross misconduct fulling under I'aiagr ph ?21(4)(j) and (1) ot the ^hastri Award read in conjunction with pai giaph it! 28 of the Oesai AwaiJ The Second chaige was that Muthukn hnan, in collision and con^pnacy with V J E iskar Rao, permuted and enabled Btskar Rao unauthonscdly to tn ash cheques diawn by him on rus ncount with the Madras lo:al hcad-oirlce without sufficient balance in. his . ccount to recover the tii wings at the time of su h encashments, and in puisuan^e of the said conspiracy, he deliberately delayed despatch of suueh cheques with itniitance schedules foi pcnuds rang ing from two to six days with a VIL.V to aftord tin e to V. J BasUr Rao to leplem h his account With sufficient fund to meet the cheqt cs 1 iter when iceeivcd at the local head ollicc Ihe Ihrd charge related to the encashment of a ca ciuc ior Ks 200 on 9-2-1967 di.wn by motliri on his personal on account The fourth chupc was tlut he enc'ished on his personal account eight cheques fo11 a tot 1 sum of Rs hOOO drawn by OIK C P Rndh .knshirn and de'ayed despalh theicof for periods extending tiom two to foiu days with mlcnuon to affoid unaulho used person il favour to the sail R~c!h knshnan
* and thus caused wiongful lo
An enquiry was held ard eventually the v/oikman was dis- charged from service by order dated 14 4 1969 holding (hut he was guilty of ehaiges (1), (2) ^rul (4) and on appeal, it was confirmed Aggnevcd by this otdcr, thi woikman ruined the Industnal Depute whi.h has icsulted in the rcfeieree being midc by the Government of Indn Ministry of 1 abcur for adjudication The reference was taken on the file of this Tnburnl m ID No 43 of 19/4 and my learnej pie- decessoi rhi u T PalaniappMi who aft<\ eOiiMc'ermK various claims and materials pi iced rendered an Awnrd on 20 12 ly75, wheicby the action of the Man gernent of the Stale Bank of India, Madns in uischa'ging Thiru P Muilnikushn n was he'd to be justified It was IEO held th it the v-oikman is not entitled to any relief and the parties were dnc.Ud to bear their respective costs
(3) Aggrieved by the aforesiid Award, the woikman Thnu P Muthukushnan filed Wlrit Petition in \VP No 2384 of 1976 to quash the Award WP No 2384 ot 1976 was disposed of by the Honourable ML Justice Sathiadev en 30th M y, 1979 The High Court held th it Ihe ehuges fiaincd against the woikimn wnuld not come v> (hi i the ambit cf paragraph 521 (4) (]) of the Sastiy Awird . nd theiefore remanded the matter to this Tribunal for ihe purpose of finding out as to under which categaiy of "minur misconduct" the a t5 committed by Thiru P Muthj^nshnan would fall, nnd on thit basis to impose app'-op'/a c punishment Ds- s-it'sficd with the oidei ot the High Comt ir> W P No 23S4 of 1976, the Manjgement-Bank picl^rred Writ A.ppea] in W A No 524 of 1979, while the worknnn alFo prcfeircd Wnt Appeal No 680 of 1979 to auath the Awird ra sea by this Tribunal altogether The Division Ben^h of our High Court compns ni? of the Honourible M' Ii stice GoKula- knshnan and the Honourable Mi fusUce P I'nam h.ive eventually disposed of these Writ Apt eili m 16 7-19&2. The Division Bench has held that they do rot find a'ly merit in both the Writ Appeals and accordingly both the Writ Appeals were dismissed But the D.vi&ion Bench Ins given the following specific diiettion to th's Inbi.ml 'The Tnbuml >s dneeted to expodite the m a t^ as speedily as possible, since the show cause notice issued by the Minage- ment to the worker Muthuknshnin dntcs back as 23 8 1967 and the reference of the dispute made by the Government to Ihe Tribunal is 15-11-1974"
h d been fiianted by this Tribunal. While eo on 18-9-1982, it- ^ianagement remained aDsent and there was no lepresen- tauon ior the Management while the counsel fot workninn Lined thi t he is re.dy and wanted the muter to be taxen i,p iloweve , in the absence of the Management 1 pointed OLIC to the learned counsel for the woi.lc.man to apprise finally the Muiigemcnt so tnut thj matci can be disposed of at least o.i me adjuumed date Accordingly, the matter stood adjourned to 25-9-1982 On behalf ot the woikman an uii J mt oi service of the factum of Ihe hcanng on the Management has also been filed on 25-D lyK2. On the s i /io day, the Management filed another petition supported by the affidavit to the effect that the heaung must be ad- j dined by ajothci fortnight As this application was stoutly ICM ted by the woikmui the application in Miscellaneous Appli atjon No 133 of 198.1 fled by ihe Man ecmc nt was dismissed ynj learned counsel for the woikman Thiru A. KLU i chandi"ii commenced his atgumcntj but in order to complete hi8 arguments as well rs to hear the aigumeDts of the \i inngement, the matter was again lmally acljourned to 27 9-l'JB2 at 2 30 P.M rs desired While so aftci the digu- m^rLS uf woiknian were concluded, again Management wau- tcj to Ue jnothci application Miscellaneous Application No. 154 of 1982 supported by an allidavit to adioum the hearing bv anothei fortnight As the ajguments of workman v\e;e concluded the oielcis on tins application weio also reserved alter heaiing the paities Ihe facti so fur set out would speaL loi themselves This 1 nbunal has beel specifically uskui to dispose of thft matter as expeditioubiy as possible in view cf the fact that the show ciuse notice issued to 1he woikman is dated 23-8 1967 and the refeiance made by the Government of India is 15-11-1974 In the face of the dncction of the Division Bench there is little foi me to accede to the request of the Management to grant any fur- ther time It is not us though the Management had not sufficient time to move the Supteme Court Moreover, even if any Avvaid is passed by this Tribunal after lemand a^d the same will be subje t to any ordeis of the Supreme Court chiPc-ngmg the oiJer of ihe Division Bench dated 16-7-1982. 'hcK-foi*- no riejudice whatsoever is caused to the Manage- ment Admitted y, the woikman has been discharged fiom SCIVICC by oidei dated 14 4 1969 and he was earlier placed un juspciwion even fiom 27 9 1967—-vide E\ M-27. There- fore it is obvious that the concerned workmin Is out of job foi 15 years The finding of the Single Judge of the High Couit in W P No. 2384 of 1976 which has been duly con- firmed by the Division Bench of our High Court in W A. Nos 524 and 680 of 1979 is th.it the workman has commit- ted only 'minor misconduct,' under pj ag aph 521(7) of the Sasln Award, "an employee found §dilty of minor mis- conduct rray (,i) be watntd or censured; or (b) have an adverse lemark cute ed &a inst him, or (c) have hih increment stopped foi a renod not loiigcr than six months" As a matter of fa I even the learned counsel for the Manage- ment Thiru Suijay Moh in fairly concedes that if eventually the older of the Smg'e Judge of the High Court as confirmed by the Division Bench is to picvail the Management cannot discharge the workman fiom service Further more, in the ./ffidavit in support of Miicell meous Application No. 134 of 1982, it is stated that ,n application his been taken out be- fore the Division Bench vvhi h disposed off W A No 524 of 1979 sedutiK extension of time gi anted Cor disposal of the Irdustn '1 Dispute Significantly, even the copy of 1he nnpl cition, said lo have been taken nit b.^foie the Division Bench jnaymn for extent on of time has not been placed before this Tr.bunal for finding out the circumstances under which the St id . plication Ins in fact been made Further more, f"om the Division Bench Order of the High Court, there is no time limit whatsoever his been fixed to dispose of the maft-ji by this Tribunal The learned Jrrlge only say th it regard being had to the facts of the case namely that show ciuse nofke Irs been issued (o the woikman even as cirly as 21 8-1967 (the oidcr of suspension of the workman fiom 27 9 1967—vide T\ M-27) hed only direcfed this Tn> bunal to expedite th.= matter as speedly as possible There fo e theie is no que.rion of CAlension of time to be granted by the Divi ion BTCII Ihcrelore there I? no merit in Mic- celhneous ADP'I atlon Ni 134 of 1982 and deserves to be fliim'ssed and is hereby dismissed but without costs Learned counsel for Minageraent Thuu Sinjay Mohan statrd that he is submitting h s arpamrnts on merits without prejudice to tal ing up the ouW of the Division Bench of Madras High Court IU appjal to Suptome Court of India (4) In the light of the express duection of the Divi IOM Bench, as soon as the o der was received by this Tnbunnl, the worker has also made Miscellaneous Apf'ic HOT NO 121 of 1982 ditcd 31 8-1982 to hear and d ,po e of the mattei at an earlv date While the Industinl Dispute was taken up on 4-9-1982 the rnpliration filed by ihe wjikman, n nely Miscellaneous Application No 121 of lW was d ^missfd rs unnc<:tis"try in view of the Petition filrd by the Manigi- mcit on th-it div bating that this Tribunal mny be pleased (O adjourn the above dispute by atlenst two weeks anj render lustlee Accoidinpjy tint Petition was allovcd by th's Tn- bunpl and &"> denied by the Management two week1, lime
O) ComiriR to the facts of the case, the only duty cast on this Tribunal an per the Older of lemand by the decistoa
3905
the case may be, shall rely only on the materials on recoid and shall not take any fie.h evidence in relation to the matter."
The reference is about the dischaige of workman _ oy Man gerrccnt-Bank. Moreover from ihe order of the Single Judge ot the High Court as also the Division Bench, there is absolutely no doubt that right through reference to Sec- tion 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 nas Deeu acnerted to by the workman and also by al the Judges. In paUieul r, I may refer to the Older of the High Ccurt at page (28) ths Honourable Mr. Justice Sathiadev has clerly stated "As for applying Section 11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, now ihat it has been held that the charges framed would not come within the scope of paragraph 521(4)j) and (1) of the Award, the Labour Court (Industrial Tribunal) to take up ihe matter and to find out under what categJiy the misconduct would come, and on that basis, it IT ay irpp-se appropriate punishment." The Division Bench has a *.o extensively dealt with So tion 11-A cf the Industrial Di-pules Act, 1947. At page 20, 'his is what they siy, "We have already noticed 'hat the Tribunal and the High Court have ample power to being the offence com- miticj by Muihukrishnui under the pioper provision of law, even though he hod been ch.iged for a serious offence. This rowe, is i!e'i\eJ both f-om Section 11-A of the Industrial Cl'-pjt.j Act and alro vnder the law as it existed prior to tho'int oauction of Se lion 11-A into tne Act." Taking all Ihe facts which constituted misconduct on the part of the workman Th'ru P. Muthukrishn-m and the finding that he has committed o"'y "miro- misconduct" as contemplated under parEnrrpb 52l'6)(-) o.r the Sas'ry Award read as "neglect of work, nr/ig-nce in pei forming duties" I have no hesifai on to find ih t the workman is guilty under para^ graph 521'Ore) of SPSU-J Awa-d. Pangraph 521(7) of the S?siry Awed ~° ds rs '"An employee found guilty of minor misconduct r,v>v : (a) be warned or censured; or (b) have an adverse -r-,-''ik cn.ered agvnst him., or (c) have his increment stoppc! for r period not longer than six months." On the frets d'Vlossd and in the interest of justice I order h;s incremrn* stopped for a period of six months under paragraph 52i(7ir") of Sastiy Award. Jt follows that the workman Th'ru P. M^th'ikr^hn n must be deemed to be in service f, 'i"1' th' dr'e cf suspension ('s is evidence from _Ex. M-27) ->n 27-9-1957 with Ml bfck wages with attendant benefits if "'ny sub:e'.l to the penalty imposed by this Tri- bunal, viz.. PX-OT h;s inrrcment bein
l i g ht of t he o n l or of • ' - •; I f i : - *i O V . IT t h e re is l i t t le s u b s t a n ce
r r - .n T Mm A TJ • m r h T ( ' ' ?n h ad p l a c ed b - f o re t h is T r i b u n al
' 3905 THE G VZETTE OF INDIA. : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I- S E C. 3(ii)]
imposed for such minor misconduct under paragraph 521(7) (c) stopping his increment for a ponod r 1 six months, the Management is directed to reinstate h -n forthwith. The woikman Thiru P. MuthukiMinan ".eiild be entiled to fi'll back wages with attendant benefits if any from 27-9-1967 subject to the penalty ip^posed under paragraph 521(7:(cJ stopping his increment for a pc od of s x months. I also direct the Management to p^y the cost of Rs. 300 to wo-k- man.
Dated, this 29th day of September, 1982
PRESIDING OFFICER
T. SUDARSANAM DANIEL, Industrial Tribunal
WITNESS EXAMINED
For both s;des (Before and after remand) : Nil.
DOCUMENTS MARKED (Before remand)
For Worker :
Ex. W-l—Circuhi No. 7 of 22-1-1951—G-83 q'ving a clear pictine of responsibility of the Age-t of a Bran h Bank. (copy).
Ex. W-2/22-7-70—Order of the Bank to Thiiu K. P. Ramachandran stopping increment for twi days, (copy)
Ex. W-3—Enquiry Proceedings dated 18-10-1969. ex- planation dated 18-10-1969 3nd findings relating to Thiru K. P. Ramachandran.
Ex. W-4/19-11-75—Staff Circular No. 65 'ssiied by the
Bank.
For Management:
Ex. M-l/23-8-67—Show cause notice issued to Thiru P.
Muthukrishnan. (copy)
Ex. M-2/8-9-67—Explanation of Thiiu P. Muthukrish-
nan to Ex. M-l. (copy)
Ex. M-3—Charge sheet issued to Thiiu P. Muthukrish-
nan. (copy)
Ex. M-4/9-11-67—Letter fiom Thira P. Muthukrishnan to the Bank submitting that ne has not committed any acts of misconduct (copy)
Ex. M-5—Statement by the prosecution against Thiru
P. Muthukrishnan. (copy)
Ex. M-6—Statement on behalf of the delinquent in de-
fence, (copy)
E \. M-7—Enquiry Proceedings. (<~opy)
Ex M-8/27-12-68—Letter from the Bank to Thiru P. Muthuki ishnan proposing the punishment of discharge, (copy)
Ex. M-9/7-3-69—Reply letter from Thiru P. Muthu- krishnan to the Disciplinary authority, in reply to Ex. M-8. (copy)
Ex. M-10/14-4-69—Order of dischaige ismed to Thi>u
P. Muthukrishnan. (copy)
Fx. M-lt/28-5-69—Appeal submitted by T h ru P. Muthukrishnan to the Deputy Se"r-''ai> and T ea- surer/Appellate Authority, (copy)
Ex. M-12|26-8-69—Order on the appeal Pled bv Thiru Ex. M-l6—Letters despatched register for the psriod
f-om 28-3-64 to 20-9-67. (Register)
Ex. M-17—Shioffs Cash book for the period from
13-5-66 to 3-12-66. (Register)
Ex. M-18—ScroU Payment Book for the period from
5-12-66 to 31-7-67. (Registei)
Ex. M-19—Certified statements of accounts (Savings Bank) relating to Thiru V. J. Baskar Pao for the period froii 23-10-62 to 1-1-68.
Ex. M-20—Ru'es of conduct.
Ex. M-21—Attendance Register for the period from
2-1-67 to 30-6-67. (Registei)
Ex. M-22—Cheques and Chilians of Third V. J. Bhaskai
Rao.
Ex. M'-23—Dcrrnd Draft put chafed cebit slips relating
to Thiru V. J. Bhaskar Rao.
F\. M-24—Doipnd Draft purchased debit slips relating
to Thh-i' v. J. BhasLar Rao.
Ex. M-25—Sub-Office booklet—Accounting pro;cdure
a"d Get1:- • 'instructions?
Ex M-26—Or >>>M of Ex. M-7. (Regis'o-)
Ex. M-27/27-9 57—Suspers'on ordei issue j to Thiru P.
Muthjkri;h-ian. ( opy)
Ex. M-28/9-3-74—Circular letter issued about Thiru V. S. Snmpa*h, Head Clerk, N;yve!i Branch, (copy)
Ex. M-29/12-1-73—Circubr letter issued f b ' rt Thiru K V3iJyinathI>n, Messenger at Locrl Head Office, Madras, (copy)
Ex. M-30/22-R-67—Circular letter issued about Thiru
Vaiaigal P. Muthukrishnan and V. J. Blr>kar Rao (copy)
Ex. M-31/22-8-67—let'er sent to the Chief Accountant nbout Thirtivalcrga1 P. Muthukrishnan ard V. J. Bh"sl-ar Rr.o. (copy)
Ex. M-32/18-8-67—Letter from the Deputy Secietary & Treasurer of the Bank to the Agent of State Bank of India, M^dras-2 asking to c 11 upon T h ru Mi'thnkrishnpn to subnvt h
Ex. M-33/19-9-67—Letter from she Deputy Sec etary & Treasurer of the Bank to the Agent of State Bank of India, Mndras-2 asking to serve charge- sheet on Thiru P. M'uthukrishnan. (copy)
After remand : Nil.
T. SUDARSANAM DANIEL, Presiding Officer
Industrial Tribunal
[No. L-12012/156/73-D. II(A)]
A. K. SAHA MANDAL, Desk Officer
New Delhi, the 12th October, 1982
3907
AND
Their workers represented through the Choona Mazdoor Congress, Shram Dham, Kymore, District Jabalpur (M.P.).
APPEARANCES :
For Workmen's Union—Shri J. P. Tiwari.
For Bokaro Sieel Plant—Shri Y. S. Tiwnri.
For Contractors—Shri Rajendra Menon, Advocate.
INDUSTRY : Limestone DISTRICT : Jabalpur (M,P.)
AWARD
Dated. 25 th September, 1982
The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L-290U/12/78-D. III. (B) dated 16th July, 1981 hns referred the following dispute to this Tribu- nal, for adjudication :—
"Whether the rates of wages paid to different categories of workers of Kutcshwar Lime Stone Mine oi Bokaro Steel Limited, P.O. Gairtalai need any re- vision and if so what should be the rates of wages, dcarness allowance and Variable Dcarncs
2. After notices of the order of reference were served on the management of the Limestone Mine, hereinafter re- ferred to a" the management and the Choona Mazdoor Con- gress (Workmen's Union) as also on the con erned contrac- tor^, statements of demand were filed by the management of the I^okaro Steel Limited and the workmen but no statement wai filed on behalf of the contractors. Rejoinder was filed by one of the parties. On the statements and the rejoinder the following issues were framed :—
ISSUES ;
J. What are the different categories of workmen work- ing in the Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mine of the Bo- karo Steel Ltd. ?
2. (a) What are the rates of which the workmen of the mine are being paid their wages, D,A. V.D.A. and fall back wages 7
(b) Whether the rates at which the workmen nre paid their wages, D.A. V.D.A. and fall back wages need to be revised. If so, to what extent ?
3. To what relief are the parties entitled to 7
3. Before the case could reach the stage of evidence it was represented that the dispute has been settled between the parties and time was sought to file the written settlement. Finally on 24th September, 1982 a settlement along with an application was filed. Shri Rajendra Menon, Adyocate, for the management of the Bokaro Steel Ltd., as also for the Contractors M/s. Jaiswal Bauxite Mines, M/s. Swaitik Mineral Trading Company and M/s. Indian Stone Suppliers & Construction Company and Shri Y. S. Tiwari, Junior Manager (Personnel) of the Bokaro Steel Plant were present and heard on the application of settlement. No one for the workmen was present. It was prayed that the settlement has been duly signed by the management's representative, the Contractors and the workers Union Representative and that the dispute referred to for adjudication to this Tribunal has been settled on the terms and conditions mentioned in the settlement.
4. I have gone through the settlement arrived at between the parties and find that it is fair and reasonable. It settles the dispute between the parties for which reference was made to this Tribunal. Accordingly, as prayrd by the parties the following award is ffiven in terms of the tettlement :—
1. That the Sizer8 (Semi-skilled) workers of Contrac- tors (i) M/g. Indian Stone Supply (Construction) Company, (if) M|s. Singhal Enterprise and (lit) Mis. Power Uni.ted will be paid on piece rat; ® Rs. 10.75
850 GH 82—6
per Cu. M. of the desired 'vize lime- stone, for • period of one year. This rate will bs applicable from 22nd August, 1982. The minimum wages prescribed bv Central Government for Limestone mines will be paid to all other workers.
2. That the management of the above establishment* shall pay bonus, for the year 1981-82 to all the workmen concerned in lumpsum of Rs. 150 for the period ending June, 1982.
3, The parties to the dispute will have no claim re- garding the dispute referred to this Tribunal in future. This settlement will be implemented by 30th September, 1982 as agreed to between the parties.
The settlement alone with the application ihnll form part of this award. In view of the fact that both the parties have settled the dispute mutually there will be no order as to costs.
S. R. VYAS, Presiding Officer.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL.CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
Case No. CGIT/LC/R/24/1981
Employers in relation to Kuteshwar Limestone Quarry
of Bokaro Steel Lted.
Vs.
Their workmen represented by Choona Mazdoor Con-
gress, Kymore.
The parties beg to submit a* under:—
1. That on the basis of a demand raised by the Union, tho Central Government by their letter, dated 16th July, 1981 was pleased to make the following reference to this Hon'blo Tribunal:—
"Whether the rates of wages paid to different categoric* of Workers of Kuteshwar Lime Stone Min" of Bokaro Steel Ltd. P.O. Gairtalal need any revision and if so what should be the rates of wages, Dearness Allowance, Variable Dearness Allowance and fall back wages".
2. During the pendency of the dispute before this Hon"ble Tribunal, issue referred to this Honble Tribuna4 along with yanoug other demands made by the Union, were the sub- ject matter of repeated discussions with the Union and the employers represented by the contractors. After prolonged discussion, a mutual settlement wai arrived at on 2 lit August, 1982.
3. It is submitted that the settlement arrived i"t on 21st August, 1982 fully and finally settles the dispute thit is pending before this Hon'blc Tribunal,
4. The demand raised in the dispute pending before this
Hon'ble Court was settled on the following terms:—
"(1) The Union had demanded to revise the wiges of workers of contractors establishment i.e. Establish- ment of (1) M/s. Indian Stone Supply Construc- tion) Co. (ii) Ms. Singhal Enterprise and (iii) M|i. Power United. After detailed discussions it wn agreed between the parties that sizers (semi-skilled) of these establishments will be paid on piece 'ate ® Rs. 10.75 per Cu. M. of the desired size Hme stone, for a period of one year. This will be appli- cable from 22nd August, 1982. Tho minimum wagej prescribed by Central Government for Lime Stone mines will be paid to all other workers."
"It was pointed out during the discussion that a case regarding revision of wages, wage-scales etc. of workmen of Mis. I.S.S., M|8. S.E. and M[i. JEM, is pending before the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur. It was agreed bv the workmen's representative^ and Managements of Establishment concerned, who nre parties befor*
3908 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. ?(")]
the Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur, that a copy of this settlement will be filed before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court jointly alongwith a compromise petition on which theii principal employer will also be requeited to sign and same would be filed in the above court with a request to give an award in teims of the sottle- ment. This settlement settles ill th? outstanding disputes between (he managements of above estab- lishment and their workmen and workmen will have no claim regarding the same in future, This settle- ment will be implemented bv 30th September, 1982."
5, The parties have agreed to file a copy of the above
settlement dated 21st Aufiust, 1982.
6, II is submitted that the settlement arrived at on 21st August, 1982 fully and finally settles the dispute that is pending before thii Hon'ble Tribunal,
7. The said settlement is lair and rc.iionablc and is in the interest of justice, incluitn.il peace and vvelfaic of the wo,- kws.
8. It is in the interest of justice that the Av i 1 bj given
in accordance with the above settlement.
PRAYER
It is theieforc prayed that this Hon'ble Couir be pleased to give the award in terms of the settlement settling (he dispute.
MEMORANDUM- OF SETTLEMENT ARRIVED AT BETWEEN THE MANAGEMENT OF 1. M|S. SINGHAL ENTERPRISES, 2. POWER UNITED. 3. ISS & CO., 4. J.B.M. 5. SMTC 6. SCC. 7. SKM RAISING CONTRAC- TORS IN KUTESHWAR LIME STONE MINES OF SAII , BOKARO STEEL PLANT AND THEIR WORKMEN RE- PRESENTED BV CHOONA MA7DUR CONGRESS, NOW BOKARO STEEL LIME STONE MINING WORKERS UNION ON 21-R-1982 AT KVTNI
PRESENT :
Representing Management:
1. Shri Purshotam Agarwal
of M/s. S. E.
2. Shri Ramcsh. Bhuwalkn
of M/s. P.U.
3. Shri Samitmal, of
M"/s. ISS Consin. Co.
4. M/s. Jajswal Bauxite
Mines.
5. Shri D. H. Godha, SMTC
fi. Shri Ramesh, S.C.C.
7. Shri Krishna Mehrotta,
(SKM).
Representing the workmen
Sarva Shri
1. R. K. Sharing, President,
2. J. P. Tiwari, Vice Piesidcnt.
3. Vishnu Dutt Dwivcdi,
Secretary of the Chuna Mazdtir Congress, now Bokaro Steel Lime Stone Mining Workers Union.
The above said union had raised some disputes with the managements of above esfablishmentn. The issues were di-)- caused on 20th August, 1982 and 21M Au/tmt, 1982 at Katni in details and following settlements were amved at:
(1) The union had demanded to icvise the wages of workmen of contractors establishments i e. rstab- liihments of 1. M\s. ISS. ?. M|s. S.N., 3. M|s. P.U. After detailed discussions, H was agieed be'- ween the parties that sizeis (semi-skilled) cf the^e establishments will be paid on piece rate, @ Rs. 10.75 per CLI. M. of the desiicd bize lime stone, for a period of one year. '1 his will be applicable trom 22nd August, 1982. The minimum wages prescnbed by Cential Government for I irne Stone mines will be paid to all other workmen.
(2) The issues lelating to Bonus, Retrenchment Com- pensation, Leave Salary and Piovidcnt Fund had been raised by the Union and they were discussed in detail, During the discussion, both the parties stated that bonus till the ye:ir J 980-81 has been paid to all the woikmcn conceincd & thus bonus only lor the year 1981-82 is to be paid to the workmen. Regarding nbove issues of Rctrcni hment Compen- sation etc., it wan stated by both the paitle- that the woikman working wilfi M/s. Swastik Mineral Tiading Corpoiation (SMTC), M/s. Jai,wal Bau- .xite Mines (IBM) and M'/s. Shii Krishna Mehrotr.j, Nf/s, SCC who have not been awarded any con- tract, have been re-employed by the picsent con- traitors i.e.,
(i) M/s ISS Indian Stones- Supplies (Construction) Co
(ii) M/s. Powers United (PU); and
(iii) M/s. Singhal Enteiprises,
It was alto stated by the Union th.it these v.o,kcis have not been paid retrenchment compensation b> the out-ROing contractors ;md so, the present con- tra-tors, by whom these workmen h .\ c been em- ployed, should pay their retrenchment compensation, leave salary, bonus and other dues if any to them. It vws pointed out by the representatives of the managements of the above establishments that majo- rity of these wo'rkirs have not worked requiied No, of dayi in a year with their previous employer to entitle them for tetrenchment compensation. But those workers, who worked for lcquircd No, of dava with their pievious employer .uid are entlt'ed for retrenchment compensation would b'; paid by tes- pective contractors with whom they weie employed till 30th June, 1!>82. However, it was not ugrecci by the Union. After dismssion on these issues in detail, it was felt difficult to arrive at correct figure. It w.is also felt tint taking into consideration the l.ibour psychology, it would be proper to devise Fomc acceptable basis Thcrcfoic, takinjj into consideia- tion, all the nios and cons, it Wris agiccd between both the parties that a lump sum ol K-, 150 will be paid to each and cveiy workmnn -w i \ing with them on account of Bonus upto June, 1482. It wos also agreed that cich of the followir.: mtitr.ictori will pay R>.. 35 on account of ietipni.lrrent com- pensation, leave salaiy & othei- dues and claims per worker for eaqh year the conttactLi"; t:)nLcined have worked the contracts as Tien'ioncJ ;n Ann"x. I.
(3) The Union also pointed out that there is no pioper method of keeping basic record), of attendance by (he contractors and so difficulty aiiscs and have arisen in the past and therefoic, a proper method should be evolved for this puiposc. It was agreed between the patties thtit in fulure, conlirctom' man deputed to record attendance of. vvorkmrn will cive a token to each workman emoloysd bv ih^rn at the time of markinc their attendance which the work- man concerned will deposit in ,i box kept fot rhe purpose, ?nd only after dcoositinfi the f iken In the box. the woikman will po to the vvuiK-Mt1 to repott for duty. The mun taking attendance of Hi-; work- men and civinn tokens io them will mark their ittcn- dance on i sheet in triplicate on th; busis of num- bfri of tokens iicnosite,l in 'he box -ird lend two fpuies i.e., 2nd and 3rd copies 11 *h? si(e-,'n-charce. The "(ite-in-ch.irce in his (urn wll Lross check the attendance on the basis of actual attendance who are not found at the woik-site, in bfHh the iheels
3909
.inJ send the same back to the net ion who took tile attendance at the first instance. The attendance lecordiOK man will ietain the second copy with him- self fo: iccord of the establishment i nd send the third copy to ihc office of piincipal employe! i.e., Man.ijwnimt of kute.shw.n I ime Stone Mines of SAIL Bokaro Steel PLini. which will he final pi escntec/absentee statement iefiarding workmen and will setve the purpose of hasic document for the puipose of Bonus, Retienchment Compensation etc where attendance figures of workmen rniiy he le- quiied in future.
It was discussed between the Union and the Management ol these establishments that loadinK workers will be fiiven ,iltc.nau'-e jobs in the category on un-siuiled workmen if there i-. no placement ol" wagons on the d ly of thei" being piesent at woik
It w.u pointed out din inn the discussion that a case regard- ing icMsion oi wascs, wage-scales etc. of wo.km-n of M / t. JSS, M/s SMTC it MA JEM is pending befoie the Presid- ing Olh.'er, Industrial I lihun.il-cum-Laboui Court, Jabalpur. 11 was agieed l>> the workmen's jepiesenutKes and manage- ments of establishments concerned, who are parlie, befoie the. Industrial Tiihunnl-cutn-l ubo'-"r Court, Jabalpui, that a copy of th's 'ctllement "vill be filed belofo the Jndusiiial Tii- bunal-CLim-Laboui Com I jointly along with a compromise pe- tition on which they piincipil employer will also be requested to slcn and same would be fikd in the above court with a re- quest to gi\e .in award iti terms of the settlement. This settle- ment seliLs .ill the outstanding disputes Hetv een the manaj;c- menh of abo\e establishments :>nd theii workmen and work- men will have no claim regarding the same in future. This settlement will be implemented by 30th Septc i h e\ 19R2.
SIGNATURE
Representing Management: Repiesenting the WojKmen.
1, S hu P u i s h n t um • \ J . 1 I * I^ t 'l '. S h ii r t. I .. S l i a i m .i
of M/s. S.E.
(President)
Sd./- Sd . /-
2. Sri Ramcsh Hhuwalka (P.U ) -i. Shri J. P. Tiv/aii
(Vice Piesidem)
Sd/- Sd /-
i. Sri Samitmal, I.S.S. .1 Shii V'uhnu Dutt Dwivcdi
(Secretary)
Sd/- Sd /-
4. J.B M.
Sd/-
5. Si i D, II. Ghodd, SMTC
Sd/-
6. Sn Ramesh, S.C.C.
Sd/-
7. Sri Kriihmi Mehiotia, SKM
Sd/-
WIFNESS:
1. Sd I-
2. Sd/-
ANNEXURE-1
Name ol'contractois
of No. of years
woikod
Avoiage No worko i Engaged
Z\b 207
145 140 215
(1) M/s S CC. (2) M/s S M.TC (3) M/s. J B M. (4) M/s. S.K.M. (5) M/s. I.S.S *
3 years 6 years b years I yeai J years
"'lhoujjh this paity is a continuing contractor still as no i-ompitte jeeord regarding work is not available with theoi, they will also pay the above amount ol Rs>. 35 on account of retrenchment compensation etc, to their woiknien till June 1982. It will not be out of place lo mention here that M/s SE.. P.U. and I.S.S. who have employed the woikmcn of out-going conductors will not be liable lo pay ;'tiy amount to such woikci- on account of Retrenchment, leave salary mid othci due*, und claims which lire paynbie to such woiker by out-going contractor.
S. R. VY\S, Presiding Officer
LL-29Oil/12/78-D.lII(B)J
S.O. 3699.—The puisuancc of Section 17 of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1J47), the Central Government hereby publishes the following awiird of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal Bhubaneshwar in the industrial dis- pute between the employers in I elation to the SnndefBwh Mining Labom Contract Co-operative Society Limitfd, Con- tractors at Pninanani Limestone & Dolomite Quarry and (heir workmen which WHS received bv the Central Government on 6th October, 1982.
INDUSTRIAI TRIBUNAL, BHUBANESWAR
PRESbNT :
Shii J. M. Miihapatra, M.Coin., LI-.H, Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal, Orissii, Bhubaneswar.
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 3 OF 1980 (CENTRAL)
Dated Bhubaneswar, the 27th September, 1982.
BblWEEN
The employers in relation to the management of Sunder- gaj-h Mining Labour Contiact Co-operative Society Ltd., Contractor at Purnapimi Limestone A. &olo- mitc Quarry of Rouikela Steel Plant of Steel Autho- lity of Indm Ltd. Pumapani —First-party
AND
Their workmen —Second-party
APPEARANCES :
Shri B. Raman,
Secretary, *oi Ihc first-party Sunderfraih Mining Labour Contiact Co-operative Society Ltd.
Shri B. S. Pati,
"e"f.r a3,^o r ei'i r>r "*or me second, party North Orissa Woikers' Union, Rourkela.
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, H exereife of the powers conferred by Section 7-A. and eiw"0 (d)of
3910 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)J]
31.
Mine-
Sri Jemes S/o Mogho
32.
-do-
Sri Sukra S/o Lurku
"Whather tho suspension/iefusal of omploytnent to 189 workers as montloned below of Sundargarh Mining Labour Contract Co-operative Society Limited without paying any •ubsbtence allowance with effect from 8-1-72 is justified ? If not, what rolief they are entitled to ?"
33.
-do-
Smt. Mangri D/o Lu'ku
Qry. Supervisor.
1.
34.
- d o-
Sri Junash S/o Paulush
2.
Minor
35.
List of worke.ii S i Banudhar Dash S/o Ma' dgali Dash Sri Charwa Oram S/o Champa Orarn
-do-
Jack-H Operator
3.
36.
-do-
Smt, Agnesh D/o Chambra Smt. Jauri D/o Sukra
4.
Qry. Supervisor
Sri Manin Barla S/o Birrb-isjBarla Sri Clement Xess S/o PaulusXess
37.
~do-
Smt. Saljni
5. Minor D/o Uarash
38. Smt. Susani - d o-
6. Jack H. Helper. D/o Rophel.
39. Smt. Salmi - d o-
7. Jack H. Operator D/o Barna
40. Smt. Rahil - d o-
8. Qiy. Supo visor D/o Soma
41. Smt. Julias do-
9. Chiof Supei visor
D/o Sagu
10. Minor 42. Smt. Rahil - d o-
D/o Danial
11. Miner 43. Smt. Johani -do~
D/o Nondo
12. Time Keeper 44. Juakim Barla Jack. H. Ope atoi
S/o Kushal
13. Blasting Supervise
43. Sri Lsjhar -do-
S/o Antoni
14. Jack H. Opeiator
46. Sri Junash Minor
Storo-Kooper S/o Paulush
15.
47. Sri Suratmashi T.R.W.
16. T.R.W. S/o Paulush
48. Smt. Dulari T.R.W.
17. -do- S/o Budhu
49. Smt. Silbia Miner
18. -do- D/o Julius
50. Smt. Salmi -do-
19. -do-
S/o Agapit
51. Smt. Fulmani - d o-
20. Miner
D/o Masides
~ao-
52.
Comp Oporator
21.
Sii Topal S/o Mashl
Miner
T.RW. 22.
53.
-do-
23.
54.
-co- Sri Ambnus Lugun S/o Martin Lugus Sri Bhagirathi Goala S/o Budhu Coala Sri Sombra Tigga S/o Be go Tigga Sri Oajendi a Singh S/o Basti Singh Sri Phiidus Kujur S/o Siril Kujur Smt. Phulta Dash W/o Boiiudhar Dash Smt. Sombari W/o Qajendra Singh Sri K.R. Haldar S/o K. Haldar. Sri Mansasi Kujui S/o Suloman Kujur Sri Joseph Munda S/o Soma Munda Sri K. Thankapan S/o Kolan Smt. Somari D/o Dokhia Oram Sri Surondra S/o Madan Sri Promsukh S/o Mangal Smt. Marriyam W/o Joeseph Sri Suklal S/o Sundorsan Sri Jomos Minz S/o Masidas Smt. Balmoti D/o Chirnath Smt. Sambari D/o Gandra
55.
-do-
-do- 24. Smt. Bol amdina D/o Bhagirathi Gowala
56.
-do^ -do-
25. Sri Budhu S/o Gandra
-do-
57.
^do-
26. Sri Modan Lujhar S/o Bhagirathi Gowala
Pump Operator
58.
-do-
27.
Sri Bhimsont S/o Amrus Smt. Panlina D/o Karlush Smt. Santi D/o Mogho Sri Temba S/o Kinu Sri Soma S/o Bhokro Sri Korma S/o Mitu
Sri Sukra S/o Bhagirathi Gowala
Qry. Supo.vifor
59.
T.R.W.
28.
Sri Bukan Lall S/o Ghasiram
Smt. Nanki W/o Bhagirathi Gowala
T.R.W.
60.
T.R.W.
29.
Sri Dhaniram S/o Sodashlb
Smt. Somari D/& Sukhu
Miner
61.
Minor
30.
Sri Ninush S/o Patias
Sri Phulslngb- S/o Soma '
39U
62.
Minor
Minor
95.
Smt. Jawani
D/o Bhutku
63.
-do-
-do-
96.
64.
-do-
97.
- d o-
65.
-do-
-do-
98.
66.
-do-
99.
- d o-
67.
-do-
100.
-dfr-
68.
Hand Role Drillor
101.
- l o-
69.
Minor
-do-
102.
70.
-do-
103.
-do-
-do-
71.
104.
-.lo-
72.
-do-
-Jo-
105.
73.
-do-
106.
-do-
74.
-do-
-do-
107.
75.
-do-
108.
- i o-
76.
-do-
109.
-
-do-
77.
-do-
110.
-do-
78.
M l.
-do-
Jack H. Helper
79.
-do-
112.
Minor
80.
113.
- d o-
- d o-
81.
-do-
114.
82.
Jack. H. Helper
-do-
115.
83.
Miner
116.
-do-
84.
- d o-
117.
-do-
85.
-do-
118.
-do-
86.
T.R.W.
119.
-do-
87.
Minor
-do-
120.
88.
-do-
Smt. Sukro D> S'Jkra Srrtt.Phulnrni D/o Charo Smt. S'lmi D/o Mcsidas Smt. Silmi D/o Gabriel Smt. Jhano D/o Etwa SriBlsnath S/oH-bil Sri Swii. S/o ChPmp i Smt. Birshi D/o Laltna Smt. Jauri D'J Birshi Smf. Phullo S/o Jitu Sri Tihiku S/o Dhani Sri 8 mika S/o Dhani Smt. Sukro D/o Budhua Smt. Mcerry D/o Benedik Smt. Birshi D/o S'Jmw Smt. Sinnati D/o Dubraj Smt. Somari D/o Etwa Smt. Sirlrnati D/o Gopal Smt.Parbati D/o Katisao Smt. Jaumi D/o Mangru Smt. Silmuni D/o Kandru Sm1. Mangri D/o Bandhu Sri Ramdco D/o Dhadi Smt. Somiri D/o Lohari Smf. Muni D/o Muna
-do~
121.
89.
T.R.W.
Smt. Budhuni
W/o Birsha
-do-
122.
90.
Hand Holer
Sm'.Elisobha
W/o Sodrelt
91.
123.
-do-
T.R.W.
Srimati Marriyam D/o Silash Smt. Bojonia D/o Nuas Smt. Bariyam D/o Jabris Smt. Tolani D/o Budhur Smt. Allsor D/o Thomas Smt. Boronikar D/o Patras Smt. Alfas Nicodin Sri Thuru S/o Ganash Sri Patia' S/o Somra Tigga Smt. Fulla D/o Sukra Smt. Etwaii D/o Samu Smt. Budhuni D/o Soma Smt. Philomina D/o Johan Smt. Somari D/o Lodha Smt. Budhan D/o Kandra Smt. Chani D/o Lodha Smt. Libdhi D/o Lodha Sri Mangra S/o Langa Sri Dowa S/o Etwa Smt. phulla W/o Bhosa Sri Sukra S/o Birsha Smt. Chad D/o Bhtku Smt. Birshi D/o Ratia Smt. Jauni D/o Dhomo Kanhu S/o Ratia Smt. Chari D/o Langa Sri Butu S/o Langa Jagdeo S/o Doonath Sri Panna S/o Bhtku Sri Etwa S/o Kaila
Sri Somra
S/o Chrwa
92.
Minor
, Sri Dhanrnashi
124,
-do- Srimati Mangri D/o Joma
S/o Santosh
93.
Jack H. Operator
125.
-do- Sri Rupnath S/o Bolga
Smt. Flora
D/oDhanmashi
94.
Miner
Sri Labo
126.
-do^ Smt. Chari D/o Paulush
S/o Muru
3912 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PARF II—SEC. 3(ii)J
127
Hand Holer
j 6 4. Sri John a
H.H.
128
-do-
165
T.R.W.,
S/o B.irnadas Sri S' mra S/J BudliLin
129
T.R.W.
166
C/P
, Sri AnandmiM
. Sri Punna S/oRighu . Sri duhkua S/o RTghu . Smt.Gurbnri D/o Righu
. Sri Jhirga
M| ncr
130
167
P.R.W.
S/o Ch"mi\i . SriV. BiKin
Bill Clerk
J31
165
-dp-
S/o G. Vclcydhen
. Ajimil 'BTlhi
Helper
132.
161).
-do-
S/o Jhaguriu Bidi . Sn'Jar Blnj m Singh
133.
170.
-Jo- Driver -cum- M'lchanu- Misan
134.
I 7 |.
- t l o-
172.
- do- 135. 136. 137.
J7^!.
ll ind Holer Watchmm Office Asstt. Electrician LDC.
138.
174.
Miner
139.
S/o N Lias Smt. Sitlumg W/o AiiTidrtu^i Smt. Diyamdhi D/o Lodha Sri Bindhan.-i S/o MJdho Sri Bljorjn S/o Puttalti Smt. JhiMim W/oJotto Sn Jagdev S/o Divin td Pnrush S/o Bciudik Smt. S.bina S/o Silnsh
140.
175.
-Jo- Supervisor Miner
141.
142.
- L I O-
176
143.
144
177.
W/L
145.
Sn Mifuuiev
178.
S/o Si la
146.
17V. S nR Lghun ilh
147.
S/o Bidu
d o-
ISO.
148-
181.
149.
d o-
1H1.
150.
183.
151.
184.
d o- 152.
185.
186 .
153.
187.
154.
- t i n-
188.
155.
189. 156.
157.
39U
3..The case- of the first-party management may be briefly
stated thus :— •
The first-party Society was foimed and registered as tt Co-operative Society in "he year 1967. Due to thi mismanage- ment in the affairs of the Society including seiious financial irregular ties committed b> the then Piesid:nt a-id V io Presidtnt of the Suciety, an enquiry under Section 65 of the Orfsba Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 was conducted. As per statutory audit report ther-5 wepj charges of defalcation and fulsification of accounts, against the aforesaid office bearers and as such disputes under Section 68 woie filed agasnst them, decree obtained and exe Lition pioceed'ngs under Section 103 of th? Act weie pending against them. The aforesaid two office-bearers of the Society now coming to be leaders and office-bearers of the North Orissa Waikers" Union have sponsored the case on behalf of the workmen. On account of the mismanagement and other causes, the management of the Society wis supjrseded under Section 32 of the aforesaid Act and Shri H. M. Padhi, Sub--Vs'stant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, was anpouued as a Admmls- fiator to run t>e administration of the Society, and ^hri Padhi assumed chaise on 8-1-1972. On assumption of crr.rgp, the Administrator issued a general notice intimating all workers to join woik which was stamped since Ion?. About 6flO workers joined their work at Purunapini in lespense to the aforesaid notice. The Administrator never iefused any worker to join work. The former President and Vice-President of the Society who had command over some of the laboweis instigated them net to join the woik undc the administration of Shri Padhi. It is averred that no suspension Older was >ssu?d to any workman who joined work in response to th: notice issued by the Administrator on 8-1-1972. It only appears from the Despatch Register of trie Society that orders of suspension were issued to as minv as 21 person, but only 13 persons out of them received the no'ices of suspen- sion. These 23 persons ioined bad with (he Fx-President and Vice-President and deliberately absented from joining their work. They never presented themselves in th? Sccietv, n~r wanted to jo?n work. The whereabouts of these persons ueie never known-to the Society after issue of the aforesaid orders of suspension. It is also averred that they never worked as labourers and/or workers of the Society. No rction whatso- ever was taken against the labjuicrs/worke's. ministerial end other stiff who voluntarily joined on 8-1-1972 or subsemient- ly in response to the notice issued "by the Ihcn Adminisf-a- tor. It is contended that the list of woikers furnished in (he order of refe-once apnems to be fictitious ?r<\ fAe.
4. Tt is further averred that the Society was constituted by individuals who only contributed their labour to the Society. Unless an individual becomes a member and share-holder of the Society, he is not entitled to employment in the Society in any canacitv whatsoever. With this object the Society was constituted and named as the Sundergarh Alining labour Contract Co-operative Society J Id, Punmanani Once a person is removed from membership of the Society by its gen-pl horlv. Ihe matter is final rnd the npi-on rprvjvpd cannot claim employment in the Society. It is aveired that the persons against whom orders of suspension were passed had been rernrwi by th* aeneral body of "he Society in their meetint? }Hd on 11-6-1972 and ->s
It is furthei contended that the dispute in Question is a dispute between the past members of the Society -md thf Socie'v within the meaning of Section 68 of the Oti^a rp-or-mt;-,,p <5Ocipt-?s A<*t tovrhirq (he bi's'n-". - ci '-n->r c- ment of th" Sociefv '^ ns "nch, the dispute rpfened inter the provisions of ih" Industrial Disnvrtes Act is incompetent and w'tho'-t imisdiction.
In the pddiiionai wiinon-siatcmcrt filed bv th.> 'mnare- pient it -;od of l''rn>'*p'inn r nV S-<~Hon 69 cf th- O-i-si r ^ n m i ' l i" "5o~;,- "-, Art ;, s,\ ve^,, A, S, ,A t h3 d;q m,,e ;n fh; cpsfi ;<> clpor-,v n
5. Considering the pleadings of the parties contained in thsir written statements the following points arise for ccn- sidcration :—
(1) Whether the reference u incompetent and not main- tainable in view of thj provisions of Section 68 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 ?
(2) Whether the peisons named in the list of workers appended to the leference v/ere, in fact, wo-krren or not under the first-paity ?
(3) Whether suspension/refusal of empLjment had ac- tually taken place wah effect from 8-1-1972 and if so, whether ii is justified ?
(4) How many and which of the workmen have been affected by the order of suspension /refusal ?
(5) To what lelief, if any, are the second-party workmen
entitled ?
I would take up each of the poin's in seriatim.
Point No. 1
6. The contention of " "• ..'iout the maintain- ability of the reference .' •. . •.•• P; 68 of we Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, would no: hold good on the facts of the present case and in view of the Division Bench, .deci- sion of our own High. Court reported in 1982 C.L.T. Page 279 (Workmen of Orissa Police Co-operative Syndicate and State of Orissa and others). It is laid down by their Lordships that from the spectrum and purposes of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Orissa Co-onerative So- cieties Act, 1962 it is clejr that an industrial dispute doe* not come within the purview of the d'spi'te contemplated undu the Orissa Co-operative. Societies Act and is not capable ef being resolved by the Registiar of the Co-operative Societies* On the facts of the present case the contention regarding the bar and maintainability of the reference does not therefore, hold good.
Point No. 2
7. According to the terms of the reference the woikmen are 189 in number. The first witness for the workmen second party, who is an Inspector (Time), Pi'iunanani Lime Stor; Quarry of the Rourkala Steel Plant has stated in his evidcr.e that they are maintaining registers (Form 'B' Register) con- cerning labourers working in the quarries, includ'ng the quarry nm by the first-party. He has fuither stated that after the list of _ workers was given to them by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, they checked up whh referent to Form 'B' Register and found out only 81 names occurring therein. He has prepared a list of these workmen 8s per Ext. 2 He has also proved Form 'B' Registers, Exts. 3, 4 and 5. Apart from the evidence given by W.W.L no o'her evidence has been adduced on behalf of the workmen as to whether the alleged workmen named in the list of rcfj-ence were really the woikmen at the material time.
8. As to the actual number of workmen, both the parties a'so appear to have relied on the evidence of W.W.I, the Inspector (Time), Purunapini Lime Stone' Quarry of the Rourkela Steel Plant. ITie only conclusion, therefor- thpt can be drawn is that only 81 workmen as ner Ex' 2 were the workmen from amongst 189 workmen who we „ working a' the material time.
Point No, 3
9. As to the question of suspension, she rase of the first- party is that after the Adrnimstnitar (M.W.2) took over the management, there was dis'nri-'nre in the working of the mines and as surh it necessitated him m take fffective mea- "-i ?s tostirt vork in th" -ninps H" "herrfo-e i- i>c! " rr~eral notic" intimating all workers to ioin th? work which was stooped for some ti"ie, whereafter about 60O worker, ioired tneir_ work, but a few b^nt upon to create di<=turb-nce did rr>t join. A,s atim'n!l*frativp mepsir^s i^d wi'h a V'PW to n,-tK-te them to ioin the work -K-er,inn r-de-s v ere issued only to ?3 persons but ns ret- r i ^ n t 'h -ppist'r only H n=r- 'ons had received such orders Tt is sought to be ron'ii-e! that the first-party never ;,-it"Ty>d to threw these pp sons ont
3914 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . OCTOBER 30, 1982|KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)J
of employment, but it wanted that these person;, should come forward and ask tbe management to be given work. No disciplinary action was taken against any of these suspended workmen. The second-party do not, however, slate in their written-stotement as to how many workmen were susperded They, however, contend that suspending the workmen wiihout paying any subsistence rillowjncc is illegal. It is also con- tended that in the absence of any disciplinaiy action having been taken againsL them, and without taking ihcm track into lervice, tie pcrsons/workmen who were suspended are entitled to be reinstated with back wages. So far an refusal of em- ployment ii concerned, the second-paity workmen ha\e not breathed a word in their wrltten-stalement thai any workman has been refused employment by the first-parly management. The case of the management with regard to the refusal of employment is that the management has not refused em- ployment to a single workman who has come forward lo join work. Now I shall take up whether the action r)f the management in suspending some of its workmen was justified. The management contends-that the suspension orders issued to 23 workmen were in the nature of threat so ns to enable the Administrator to restart the work. It also contends that the orders of suspension were not tcally in Ihe natuie of disciplinary proceeding against the so-called suspended workers As the suspended woikers never joined their work, nor claimed subsistence allowance or reinstatement, the manage- ment cannot be said to b^ at fault. Considei ing the facts and circumstance of the case- and the principles of natural justice I am however of the view that Ihe orders of sus- pension cannot be said to be justified as not only no subsis- tence allowance has been allowed to the workmen but also no suspension has taken place in contemplation of any dis- ciplinary action against the workmen. Moreover, no drs;i- phnary action had, in fact been taken against nny of lh" workmen. If the suspension orders were passed only with a view to pressurize the workmen to join work, as contended bv Iho first-party, 1 am of the view that after the normal situa- tion prevailed, the management should have canceled iho suspension orders and asked tha workmen informing them to join work. There should have been some order in show that the suspension orders \*ere recalled or that they were not meant to be acted upon. I wnuld, therefore, hold that the action of the management in passing the suspension orders against some of the workmen is not at all justified.
As there is absolutely i>o averment on the side of the necond-parte workmen about the refusal of employment to any of the workmen, the question of adjudication on the justifiability or otherwise doijj not arise. The contention of the management, on the olher hand, should be accepted that in response to the general notice after the take over by the AdminijtraTbr quite a largo number of workmen, say nbout 90 per cent, joined work -and none of them was refused employment.
Point No. A
10. I shall now take up as to how many individual work- men and who of them were actually suspended by the order of the management. According to the management 23 IUS pension orders were issued, but the orders could be served only on 13 workmen. The workmen did not aver anything in their written statement ag to how many woikmen or who of them were suspended. They also did not lead any evidence on the point except through one wit- ness CW.W.3) who has proved his own suspension order, Ext. 6, to lay that he wai suspended from work. In such ttate of affairs it is not possible to come to a definite finding as to who were the workmen suspended in this case except W.W.3. Even the workmen have not stated in their written statement or by way of additional written-statement as to who were tbe persons suspended in this case. The manage- ment also does not name the 13 workmen who had received the suspension order. In such state of affairs relief can be given only to W.W. 3 Gaiendra Singh (SI. No. 8 of the list of workers given in the reference),
W.Wi3. 2. 4. 5 and 6 have given evidence to show lhat though demanded, they were not given any employment bv the management. There is no documentary evidence like Ext. 6 to prove tout they were actually suspended by the managemen*. Ft h, therefore, difficult to come to anv conclusion whether they were actually suspended or refused employment by the management.
11. Both the parties have filed written note* of Arguments in support of their respective contentions. The management first-party in paragraph 5 at page 2 of the written not^ of argument>i has admitted that 9 workmen a" per SI. Nos. 2, 3, 6. 11. 35, 58, 61, 62 and 64 of Ext. 2 were wnongst tho workmen who were suspended by the management (obviously by its order dated 23-3-1972). On their own showing, there- fore, the management has admitted that these 9 workmen, viz.. Martin Baria, Clement Xcus, VUnmasi Kujur Ismes Mini. Bhukon Lall, V, Balen, Alexis Kujur, Jakrias Jajo and -Matias Jojo were suspended. In the liaht of nw discussions that the suspension orders cannot be sustained in tho eye of law, ihe aforesaid nine workmen ar: also entitled to reinstatement in service.
Point No. 5
12. In conclusion, I would hold that W.W.3 Sri Gajendm Singh and the none workmen Matin , Barle, Clement Xe"q Manmasi Kujur, James Mini Bhukan Lall. V. Balen. Alexis Kujur, Jakrias Jojo and Matias Jojo (SI. Nos. 8, 3, 4, 13, 21, 59, 131, 139, 140 and 142 of the list of workers In the schedule of reference) are entitled to the iclief of ie- infitatement in service. As. W.W.3 Gajendra Singh according to his statement, is working under the contractor R. C, Sahu, Pumapani since 1973, he is entitled ty full back wa"ei" from the date of suspension tili his re-employment in the firm of Shri R. C, Sahu. With re^rd to the remaininu nine work- men!, viz., Martin Barla, Clement Xess, Manmasi Kujur, James Minz. Bhuken Lall, V. Balen, Alexis Kujur, Jakria§ Jajo and Matias Jojo there is no evidence before the Tribunal that they are still unemployed. They are, therefore, not entitled to any back waxes.
13. The Award is passed accordingly.
J. M. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Offlttr.
Industrial Tribunal Orissa, Bhubanetwur.
[L.29Olll28|78-D.inB]
ORDER
New Delhi, the 11th October, 1982
S.O. 3760.—Whereas the Central Government ij of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between thfr employers in relation to the management of Huttl Gold Mines Company Limited, Hutti and their workman in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule hereto annexed;
3915
And whcrtu the Cential Government considers it desir-
able to refer the said dispute for adjudication
Nou, therefore, in excruse of the powers conferred by Section 7A and clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Difputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby constitutes an Industrial Tribunal of which Shn V. H Upadhyay shall be the Picsiding Officer, with headquarters at Bangalore and refers the said dispute for adjudication to the said Tribunal
SCHEDULE
"Whether the termination of the sen ices of Shn Shara- nappa, Watchman Security Department by the management of Hutli Gold Mines Company Limited Hulti with effeU from 1st January, 1981 is justified If not, to what relief Is the concerned workmen entitled?"
[L-43012/5/81-D.IIKB)]
ORDER
New Delhi, the 12th October, 1982
S.O 3701 —Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the employers in re- lation to the management of Bharut Gold Mines Limited, Kolar Gold Field and their workmen in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule hereto annexed,
And whereas the Central Government considers it desirable
to refer the said dispute for adjudication.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 7A, and clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby constitutes an Industrial Tribunal of which Shn V. H. Upadhyay shall be the Presiding Officer with headquarters at Bangalore and refers the said dispute for adjudication to the said Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the demand of the casual labour employed by the management of Bharitf Gold Mines, Kola/ Gold
830 GI/82—7
Fields (I) for absorption in permanent cadre and (nj fur enhancement of wa^es if justified. If so, to what reliefs are workmen entitled ?
[No. L43011O)/82D.IH(B)]
KANWAR RAJINDER SINGH, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 14th October, 1982
SO 3702.—In pursuance of the section 17 of the Jndustnal Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal No 3, Dh.inbad, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Benjemehari Colliery of Eastern Coalfields Lim ted. Post Office Salanpur, District Burdwan .mil their workmen which was received by the Central Government on the 11-10-82
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO 3, DHANBAD
Reference No. 17/81
PRESENT :
Shn J N. Singh, Presiding Officer,
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management of Bonjemtbari Colliery of Eastern Coalfields Ltd, PO Silanpur, Dist. Burdwan.
AND
Thslr workman
APPEARANCES:
For the Employers-—Shri A. N Chatterjee, Dy Personnel Manager
For the Workman—None
INDUSTRY : Coal, STATE • West Bengal
Dated the 4th October, 1982
AWARD
The Govt of India in the Ministry of Liboiir in exercise
of the powers conferred on them U/s lOdVd) of the In dustrial Disputes Act, 14 of 1947 ha, refeired the diinuti- to this Tribunal for adwdicntion under Order No L-19012f721/ 80-DIV(B) dated the 2nd May. 1981.
SCHEDULE
"Whether thr action of the mampenvnt of TnsWn Co i fields Ltd , in relation to Bonjorr>ehan Collrry P O Seetalour, Dist Bnrdwin ir reducing the wnccs of Shrimati Snkodi Mahnlin from 'Voup V In rv"_ Cory I with effect from 18-4-1977 w-i, inMifWI? If not to what relief is the concerned workman entitled?
2 On 27-9 82 both the parties hnvi* filed a Joint nerifJ-n ot compromise dulv stened on th^ir hchnif nn ' thi*y pray flit on award bo passed in terms of the Hettiemdct
3 T hive Kone through the settlement which is beneficial for flic workman
•i.4 I", the circllrniltancps the award i, nnss'-d in term, of the settlement which shall form part of the nwnrd
Enc : Settlement
J N SINGH, Presidma Officer
3916 THE GVZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KART1KA 8. 1904 J P A RT I I -S E C, ^ u jj
BEl'ORF THE HON'BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, CEN- 1 R \L CJOVEKNMUNT INDUSTRIAL VKIBUNAL NO 3 DHANBAD
Reference No. 17 of 1981
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to Lhc Management of Benlcmihari Colliery, Eastern Coalfields ltd,, P.O, Palanpur, Dist. BwUwan.
AND
Their workmen
Joint petition of compromise :
Both the Parties herein concerned beg most respectfully to
mbmit as under :
1. That the above matter is fij"^ for hearing on 27-9-82
2. That the matter is pending and has not yet been heard
by the Hon'ble Tribunal.
3. That in the meantime the Parties negotiated the matter in dispute mutually and have come to an .imicable settlement on the following terms :
(J) That the concerned wOiIman Smt. Sukhada Meha
tin will be placed in Cat. II of the National Coal Wage AgreemenMI on the basic rate of Rs. 19.48 (Rupees nineteen and forty eight paise only) per day as from 31-3-82.
(b) That 'he concerned workman will be paid a consolidated sum of Rs. 1000 (Rupees one thousand only) in full and final settlement of all her claim for aiTear wages.
(c) That the payment of Ri. 1000 as said in the fore- going paragraph will be made within three months From the date this settlement is accepted by the Hon'ble Tribunal.
(d) That by this settlement the instant dispute is fully and finally resolved and the workman shall have no claim, whatsoever, arisinu out of the instant matter.
(e) That th
the present proceedings.
4. That both the Parties pray that the Hon'ble Tiibunal may be pleased to accept this settlement as fair and reason- able and may be further pleaded to pass an award in terms of the afoiesaid settlement.
And for this act of kindness the Parties as in duty bound .shall ever pray.
Dated this* the 27th September, 1982. For and on behalf
of the workman.
Sd./-
Sd./-
For and on behalf of
the Employer,.
1. N. SINGH, Presiding Officer.
TNo. L-19012-(72)/80.IV(B)l
S.O. 3703.—In pursuance of the section 17 of the Industrial Disputes <\ct. 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the following award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal No. 3, Dhanbad, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bcniemehari Colliery of Eastern Coalfield., Limited, Post Office Salanpur, District Burdwan and their workmen, which was received by the Cential Government nn the 2-10-82.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVfcKNMtNT INDUSTRIAL TRJBl'NAL-CUM-LABOUK c O i 'M NO 3, D1I\NBAD
Reference No. 72/KO
PREStNl : Shri ). N. Singh, Presiding Officer,
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management of Bonjemehari Colliery under Boajemc'iari Sub-Area of Ftiatern Coalfields Ltd., P.O. Sakmpui, Dt. Burdw-in.
AND
Their workman
APPEARANCES ;
For the Employers—Shii B. N. Lain, Advocate.
For the Workman—Shri S. K. Achiuyya.
INDUSTRY : Coal. STATE • West Bengal.
Dated, the 4th October, 1982
AWARD
The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them U/s. 10il)(dj of the Industrial Deputes Act, 14 of 1947 has referred the dispuTc'to this Tribunal for adjudication under Order No. L- 19012(47)-79-D.IV(B) dated 27th November, 1980
SCHEDULE
"Whether the aetion of (he management of Bonjemehari Colliery under Boujcmehari Sub-Aica of Eastern Coalfields Ltd., P.O. Salanpui. Dist. Buulwan in not regularising the employment with effect from 7th April, 1975 of Shri Sachhidanand Simjh was justified ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workmen entitled ?
2. On 27-9-82 both the parties have filed " joint petition of compromise duly signed on their behalf and they pray that an award be passed in terms of the settlement.
3. I have gone Ihiough the letllemxnt which is beneficial
for the workman.
4. In the circumstances the award is passed in lermi of
the settlement which shaft form part of the award
Enc ; Settlement
J. N" SINGH, Presiding Officer
BF.FORE HON'BLE PTiPSIDTNG OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 3. DHANBAD
Reference No. 72 of 1980
PARTIES :
Employers in relation :o the Management of Ronjcmihari
Colliery of Eastern Coalfields Limited.
AND
Their workmen
Joint petition erf compromise-
Both the Parties herein-concirn"d beg to submit most res-
pectfully as under :
1. That the above matter is fixed for hearing on 27-9 82.
2. That the Hon'ble Tribunal has not yet' heard the
present matter and the matter i\ pending.
3. That in the meantime, both the parlies mutually ne- gotiated the fnstant dispute and tho Parties have come to an amicable settlement the following terms :
3917
la) 'I hut Shii Suchidananda Singh, the concerned work- man, will be employed as a Di iver in Cat. V nn the basic iate of Rs. 19.50 pei d.iv as r<-'r Na- lional Coal Wage Agieemettt-II within a month iioru dale when he reports foi duly before the Gcne- ial Mantigci, Sulanpur Aiea and his period uf .service will be counted fmm Ihe date ol hi3 tmpluynienl as said above.
ibJ I hat the con-ciiied woikmiin when h~ icpoils for duty in teims ui the foiegoing paragraph will be posted in any of tile collieries under Ihe juns- diction of Salanpur Area.
(c) Thai the concernsJ woikman shall produce his motor vehicles driving licence (Heavy) i'i original to the Employers at Ihc time he upoils for duty as said above.
(e) T^urt by this ..cttlenient the instant dupulc is fully and finally resolved and 'he woikman shall ha\c no claim whosoever aiisinjr out of the in- stant matter.
(f) The lJmtie>j sh.ill bear theii lespectivc costs of
the present proceedings.
4. Both riie Parties may that the Hon'hle Tiibun.il may be please to accept this settlement as fair and reasonable and may be further pleased to pass an awaid in terms of the afoiesaid settlement.
And for thfs act of kindness the Parties as in duty bound shall ever pray.
For and on behalf of Foi and qn behult ol
the workman.
the Employer.
Sd./-
J. N. SINGH, 1'iesidiny Oilicci.
[No. L-190i2(47)/79-D.IV(B)j
S.O, 3704.—In pursiinn^e oi section 17 of the Induslrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), flu- Cenlral Govcrnmenf hereby publishes the following; award of the Central Govern- ment Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, in the industrial dispute between (he employers in u-l.ition to ihe management of Rani- pur Colliery of Ranipur ?ub-\rea of Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman, which1 was received by ihu Central Government on the 12th October, 1982.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNA1 • CALCUTTA
Reference No. 17 of 1980
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management of Ranipur Colliery of. Ranipur Sub-Area under the Eastern Coalfields Limited.
referred the following dispute to this Tribunal foi adjudica- tion :
"Whether the action of the management ol Ranipur Colliery of Ranipur Sub-Area under the Eastern Coalfields Limited P.O. Disheigaib, Dislt. Burdwun in supeiannuating thi woikmen (Names given in the anneuire) with effect from 1st July, 1979 is justified 7 If not, to what relief ate ihe concerned workmen entitled ?
ANNEXURE
1. Shri Ram Chabila Rjy
2. Sihii Indradco Singli
3. Shii Nagina Roy. .
4. Shii Ramdco Yddav
5. Shii Barsati llarijan
2. It is nceessaiy to point out that though five persons wuc superannuated with effect from 1st July, 1979, as will : ppeui lrom the above terms of reference itself, none except Riim I habila Roy iaises any dispute befoje this Tiibuna). All the paitics concerned in this case have made statement to this Tiibunal when Ihc case was called out for hearnij; that the four workmen named in the reference, i.e., Indratko Singh, Nagina Roy, Ramdco Yadav and Barsati Haiijan have withdrawn themselves from the dispute possibly having Itcen re-employed by Lho munagumen;. Hence a "no dispute ' award is passed so far as those four workmen are concerned
3918 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SBC. 30I)1
ol Kanipur colliery on the baiig that his year of birth wa" Ul*. it was on mat basis ana on me basis ul the opinion of IHL Aiea Meuicai Boaiu thai he was rUited with. eiitLt fium lit JUiy ly/y. lu tins view oi the matter it cutinot now te lOLind in riis favour thai lit would continue in SCIVILO upto I?b4. i rely on the. do^urnems udductd by the management. 1 uccoidingiy hula that the year ot with of Ram chabila Koy was lyly and that he was <>0 yeais old on 2dth June iy7y as touiid t>y the vvge Deteimmaiion committee.
pasted by the Personnel Manager, BCCL, Dhapbad. His pio- muuon ana designation has been challenged on the giound tnat me management in doing so violated the principles and guide lines contained in its own Promotion Folicy/cad-e aUieine (hxt. W-2J and has also not followed the tripartite settlement dated /3rd April 1975 I t i i, W-1-M.5J. It is said that under the said promotion policy senionty-cum-merii was the ciiierino lor promotion ot Junior btenbtrupher to the post oi Senior Mcnogiapher. beveial contentions have been raised on benall ot tne workmen in support of their case.
5. Aftei consideiing the evidence on leeord and the submis- sions raised by ihc parties eonceineu, my Award 13 that the [Ui.on oi the management ot Knuipur Lolliery in supei animat- ing Kiiui L,haDda Itoy with (.licet from 1st July 1979 is jtiitined and so he is not entitled to uny relief.
Dated, Calcutta,
The ?7th September, 1982.
M. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer.
[No. L-19012(40)/79-D.lV(BJ]
S.O. 3705.—In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Au, 194/ (14 of 1947;, the Cential Government hcicby publishes the following avvaiii of the Central Govern- ment industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, in the industrial dispute bt-twecu the employers in lelauon to the management ol ishaim Coking Coal Limited, Calcutta and tJieir woikmcn, whi^h was received by ihc Central Government on the 12ih Uctobei, 1982.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL • CALCUTTA
Reference No. 97 of 1980
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management of Bharat Coking
Coal Limited, Calcutta,
AND
"Their Workmen
PRESENT :
Mr. Justice M. P. Singh—ProMding Officer.
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of Employers—Sliri C. L. Ganguly, Advocate.
On behalf of Workmen—Shri P. k. Chatterjee, Advocate.
STATE : West Bengal
INDUSTRY : Coal
AWARD *™
By ,ts Order No. L-19012(56)/80-D.IV(B) dated 15th, Dccem- bci, 1980 the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, re- feired Ihc following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :
"Whether the action of the management of the Bharat Coking Coal Limited Calcutta in promoting Shri Manik Chandra Das, Junior Stenographer Office of the Deputy Chief Sales Manager, Bharat Coking Coal Limited, No. 6, Lyons Range, Calcutta as Senior Stenographer, nnd in designating him as Per- sonal Assistant, vide Office Orders No BCC'IPA! I ESTB|5|83|7566|7679, dated 21/19-11 1979'and No. BCC|SIM|ESTT|S|83/24M dated 28/29-4-1979 oT the Personnel Manager, Bharat Coking Coal Limi- ted, Dhanbad is legal, proper and justified? If not to what relief are the other workmon, who were considered bv the Departmental Promotion Commit- tee along with Shti Manik Chandra Das, entitled?"
and wa5 designated as "PA" by Order dated 20 April 1980
3. It is first contended that in the Promotion Policy, Ejit W-2, iheie is no provision roi holding any tiade test toi giving pioinotion to the Junioi Stcnogiupner to the post ot i-enior stenographer, but the management illegally arranged a tiado test in oidei to enable Mr. Das to illegally supctsede two seniot stenographers B. K, Kundu and C R. Biswas. It is submitted thai under the atoiesaid promotion policy (hxt. W-2; tlie criteria lor piomotion was sentonty-cum-merit througri Dc- paitmental 1'iomotion Committee (bneily, the DPC) and that all eujjiuie junior stenographers on the basis of then: seniority weie entitled to be given a ch.iuce and w.ero to be considered for promotion through DPC which wa3 to assess the mcr.t of the candidates upon appraisal of their service recoidi in terms of clause 11.1 oi: the said promotion policy. It is urged that this procedure was not followed by the management and even the C. R, files of the peisons concerned wtre not taken into consideration^ It is pointed out thai even in the trade test it was Dipak Kumar Sinha who stood first and so he should have been piomoted to the post oi Senior Stenographer, It id further said that in any event the post of'Senior Menogi aphcr should have been filled up by direct recruitment along with outsiders to sit in t.hc trade test. The management has denied the validity of these contentions and in my opinion lightly. Admittedly a trade test in short-hand-stenography was held in August 1979 on vacancy having occuned in the post of Senioi Stenogiapher towards the middle of July 1979 in the Calcutta office of the BCCL and that on the result thereof thtee Stenographers D. K. Sinha, M. C. Das and B. K. Kundu became eligible for consideration of the DPC which did con- sider them trnd found M. C. Das, the most suitable candidate for filling up the post of Stenographer. The authority con- cerned accepted the recommendation of the DPC and promoted M, C. Das to the post of Senior Stenographer as aforesaid Mr. Chatterjee, teamed Counsel appearing for the workmen vehemently contended that the management illegally held the trade test as it was not provided cither in the tripartite settle- ment of 23rd April 1975 (Ext. W-1J or in the Cadre-Scheme (Ext. W-2). It is true that the words "trade test" are not men- tioned m any of these two documents but it cannot be denied that the promotion was to be made on the basis of Scniority- cum-ment. The expression "merit" is of wide import. There are no specific rules in Ihe Cadre-Scheme or anywhere also regulating the method of judging the merit of the candidate. Holding of the trade test is not excluded by any provision o( the agreement or promotion policy even by implication. It cannot be denied that the holding of trade test had reasonable nexus with the performance of duty of the Senior Steno- grapher. It cannot, therefore, be characterised as arbitrary or unfair or malaflde when nothing prohibits it. As observed by the Supreme Court in Gurnam Singh va State of Rajasthan (1971) SLR 799, "No doubt the term merit is not capable of any easy definition, but it can be safely said that merit is a sum total of vaiious qualities and attributes of an employee such as his academic qualifications, his distinction in the University, his character, integrity, devotion to duty and the manner in which he discharge his official duties. Allied to this may be various other matters or factors such as his punctuality in work, the quality and outturn of work done by him and the manner of his dealings with his superiors and subordinate officers and the general public and his rank in the service. We are only indicating some of the broad aspects that may be takan into account in assessing the merits of an officer. In this connection it may be stated that the various particulars in the annual confiden- tml reports of an officer, if carefully and properly noted, will also give a very broad and general Indication regarding the merit of an officer " On a perusal of this observation ft will appear that 'merit' cannot be confident to one factor. It includes several factors Includes confidential rolls, qualifi- cation, service record, etc. Although the word "trade test' I tWnV fhSflw 1m e °b s c r v a t i o ns of ths Supreme Court, * £ . " " .£ ta I s° m ay *? a gooA factor in *• "el"ctlon of Stenographer. It appears that Annexure B to the promotion S S ^ . ^ f l T2* rTl r" *'* \S e n J or StenographeTmust hm a proficiency in Stenography aa follows : Shorthand
3919
speed—100 w.p.m., Type writing speed—50 w.p.m. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the result of the tiade test was a facloi to be considei^d along wnh other fattoi i. It will not be out of place to menijon hj.e thai th; lesult of the trade test was nol the only thing to be considncl. M'eieiy because D'ptik Kr. Smha stoud lust in the lK.de test cannot be a good giound tor promoting him to iho post or Senior Stcnogiaphcr. 'Ihe promotion WIIJ to bo done on a consiiicrri- lion ol ovciall merit by ihe DPC and nol only by the loai'lt of the Trade lest. Mi. Chaiteijee vehemently aigued that the management had illegally .ird vvilh mulalijc intention arranged lo hold a trade test. This contention has no ment. In the tiadc test Dipak Kumar Sinha who was junior to M. C. Das stood first. 11 the management hid any bad intention from the very beginning it could have managed for Mr. M. C. Das (o stand Jirst ill the tiadc test but that was not s i ll only indicates that the trade ttst was done Ii'ines.ly. Ho\ ever the icsiilt of that examination could not be consideicd in isolation. I therefore see no incut in this c\ mention It is rejected. Another line of argument in this connection h that the tiade lest was mciely Uigihlity te,i a1 d not me n test and that three candidates weie found eligible for selec- tion by the DPC.. That mi>y be so but the.e can he no legal impediment in tailing it piOhciency let an 1 also , iaclor for considering merit for the purpose of Uct.-iininYijg the minimum speed Joi beirg selected us Senior 'jlenogiaplie'. The aigument w rejected. Jl was also ivyj i Ih .1 Ihc tiade test was notified on 5-7-1979 but the it-.nlt w,,-, published on 29-11-79 when the promotion order -if Mi. D is was i-sued. It is contended that the delay wa^ significant In my opinion it is a minor matter.
4. M, Chattel jee next contended that theie was no DPC for Calcutta office in ieg:ud to Ihe piomotion for the po t of Stenographer. My attention wns drawn to clause 6.2 of Ihc promotion policy and also to the oial evidence adduced tin behalf of the workmen in suppoit of this contention. In my opinion this argument ia without any basis The written statement of the workmen itself says t'lat promotion to the post of Senior Stcnogiapher wus to be mvle on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability though the Departmental Promotion Committee vide paragraphs 3 and 5. In paiayinph 5 of 1he written statemtnl it is clearly slated, "'Ihe union in their letter of piotest dated 10 July, 1979 pointed out that the pinmoion policy and the cadre-scheme fiamed by then by lssiiirm from junior stenogiapher to Senioi stenographer should be made only on the basis of seniouty-cum-meiit through DPC in the same vvtiy as in the case of pro:no<:on liom Ciiadc 1 to Special Grade will be on the basis of senior iry-ium-suit,.- bility through D.P.C." II is thus clear that ilic workmen themselves accepted the pos tion that ihi piomotion was lo be made through DPC. 1 think th .t the aigumenf advanced before this Tubunal and the oral evidence adduced by Ihe Union go against their pleadings. Tn tho prc^er.t ca c DPC was in feet constituted by the management (vide Ext. M-b the circular constituting the DPC and laying flown promotion policy dated 20-6-77). In my opinion it ws necessary loi assessing the merit of the candidates. The point thus h.is no force.
Sttnogiaphcr. In paiagiaph 1U of the written statement the union says thai ihe pioniotion policy/cadre scheme adopted by the Management Jid not contain .my post of PA. It is Uius clcai that the validity or applicability ii the cadre scliemc/piomotinn policy was never cnalU'iigcd by ihe union in their vvutien statement though thej have done so thiough then oral evidence as well a^ in aijiument, Jl is to be noticed that the tiipaiue settlement L\i. W-l dated ^3-4-to/5 (vide clause 4 of Armexure l\ to the settlement) fiiovijcs ior Juture promotion to be in teirm of cadie scheme nuts Ihe management categorically s'ated in its letter dated 23/2t>tb Februaiy 1979 (Ext. W-6J ihat the present tadic scheme would be applicable to Cjlcutla ba-.cd em- pioyces of DLLL and asked for" suggestion? f.om the Union which "Ji to be considcud while levising the existing cadre scheme. I he union by its letter d.ited 10-7-79 (Ext. W-7) wanted to discuss lhL m tier loi evolving a norm for promo- tion but nothing niateiial was done except wntini! to the KLC or ALC (Central) makinn complaint against thhe action, of the management (vide E.\ts. W-9, W-10, W-16). Before that the Union had made correspondence wilh Ihe Manage- ment in this icgird (vide fcxts. W-3, W-4 and W-"!) but to no elfect. As ulieady pointed out it says in its wiitten siaie- i.icnt that the cadie SLlieme was violated by the management in promoting Mi. D.^s lo the post of Senior Stenographer. A reasonable coiT-tiuction of the pleading of the union leads me to the conclusion that th: union accepted the cadie scheme in its wiitten statement fot the purpose of piomotion but nieiely contended that it had been violated by the manage- ment. I'uithei more, I do not think-as to why the manage- ment would not be competent to apply the cadre scheme to the Calcutta office of BCCL. This office is a part of the Head office of the BCCL which u> at Dhanbad. I am of opin- ion that the management .vas competent to apply the same to the Calcutta ollicc. It is not in doubt that the cadre scheme provides in clause 6 2 for promotion of Junior Stenographer to the post of Senior Slenonrarihsr on the busis of seniority- cum-mcril. It also provides for promotion of Senior Steno- giapher to the post of Seni:r PA. The contention of the Union accordingly fails and is rejected.
6, It is next contendcj on behalf of Ihe workmen tljnt there WLIJ, no post of Senior Stenographer in the Calcutta office of BCLL. Reference in this connection has been made to Ext. W-l the Settlement dated 3id April, 1975 and evidence of WWs-1 and 2. The ajgument is not correct. Although there is no mention of Senioi Stenographer in the Settlement, there is such mention in the Cadre-scheme. If there was no such post Mr. Kcndti and other stenographers would not have iippcmed in the t'-ade test, In their written statement the uniun doe, not s.iy Uiat there was no post of Senior Steno- Kraphei. The written statement rather proceeds on tho basis that there was such a post. The prayer made I herein is tli.it Mr. Das may bo down-graded to the post of Junior Stenographer and thnt Sii B. K. Kundu and D. K. Sinha may be piomoted/up-grf/ded a-s Senior Stenographer with effect from the date of original piomotion. The con- tention thus faiN.
3920 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982 KART1KA 8, 1904 [ PART II- SEC. 3(ti)J
Krapher -^ (h^ "r->t higher post vvhkh w.ts ehher Sexier .Ye;ir.- ... . i1: i' \. i.i terms of ihs C\:iire-Schema it is post ;>i' So =io ,..,•••:..,!•..* and in terrrs of isle agreement it is ;ue pu i . , :' \. '••! Cnaiicrjee iias not >lio\vn to this tii- bunal thai the pay s.jle of PA is hiuhjr m_n that of Senior oienogrd;;h.r. He has not tshowji tn;*t .h_re w;s tny mor.e- la-y beneiu or -hane- in th; scale of pay of Mr. Das when he was i..deslgnateu c.s PA. Mr. Cli-.-icjicc ii"U aigued i'n:X ininicciiai-iy aher p!O.i:otjng M:. !3.,s i.s He^ior .Stenugraphci ins designation u ts Ui-'ngea ifuo I'A r.-iil this showed that the rru.iKigc'.'.icnt wanted io promote Mi. Das to ihe post cf PA ana ih>s is evkio: e of eiaiaiidc. Suffice So -ay lh..t I do not liiiJ any raabfu'e on (he part of the nr nagemem in uoir.g r..i.
8. Next it was contended by Mr. Chatieijee that the cadre- scherne ohould have bee,; wr'-lcd in consult t.on wlis the Union iii \iew of the tc-rnis o[ .-eltiement dated 23id April, 1975 which provided that the promotion moeeduie/Cadre scheme \ill be settle.! .v/l>s.'qu-inly. Jt .ippe-ir-, lo me th'.;t the ten; s of the settlement do not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the cadre-'•"cher.ie niir,t be fmrnci m consi- - tatir.n with the union, "ihc contention is thu.s dispu.scd oi.
9. A'ioihe;" Lor.ten;ion i-i'ianced on b.h !f if ihe vn.,-k- men is (nui Ext. W-6 which is a letter of ihe management d tod 23/26h i-ebrnrir\. 1979 io th? effect tha; the p esent cau:e sch.-rue wor.ij be app'icable to The Ci'lcuita bated employees oi BCCL is a depar.ure fiom the agreement. Ja my op'non. the contention is not cornet. 1 have adeury pointed oul that the" union h.is U-Ken liie srnd in tlieij written statement that the cr.dre scheme was violated by the management and not that the cadie scheme was not appli- cable to the Calcutta office.
10. Lastly il was submitted by Sri Chatterjee that the office noiiee d .ted 5.h Ju.y. I97v (Lxt. M-7) inerelv men- tions thut promot'on should be made rrom Junior Steno- grapher to Senior Stenographer but Mi. Da, \s;<.s fitted in the post of PA and this was wholly unjusiiJicd. In my opinion there is no force in this contention bc.-uu-e >!•;. Das wa% promoted to the post of Senior Stenographer and then he was merely designated (nor p'onoted) ;>s PA in terms of .he tripartite settlement daled 23rd April, 1975.
New Delhi, the 11th October. 1982
-S.O. 3706.— VVheaas ;t appsais to (lie Central Ciovcinment that the employer and the majority of the employees in relation to the establishment known as Messrs liirbal Dass and Company, 1998, Ga.'i Paratha Wall, Chandni Cbowk, Dc-ihi-6, have agreed that the provisions of the t'mployees" I'iovidcnt I-uods and Miscellaneous Provisionj Act, 1952 (19 of 1952\ should be made applicable to (he said establishment.
Now, theti-fore, in cveicise of the poweis confeired by SLb-seetioD (4) of Section 1 ( f the said Act, the Central Government hereby applies the provisions of the said Act to the said establishment.
LNo. S-35019(177)/82-PF.IlJ
CORRIGENDA
New Delhi, the 11th October, 1982
S.O. 3707.—In the notMcatio/i of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour No. S.O. 792 dated the 12th February, 1982 published at pages 925 and 926 of the Gazette of India, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the 27th February, 1982, at page 925, line 4, for "Sainwatipur" rend "Saraswaiipur": line 5. for '"Saiashattkhu' read 'Sata^ankha"'.
[No. S-350J9' 1771/81-T-F-Ill
11. Mr, C L. Ganguly, lea.'ecu Counsel appearing on behalf of ihe in:.niigenieni argued that promotion was a msnuganai function and that an empjoyee cannot claim to be promoted as of right an-_I h^nce tfiee is no s:cpe for any adjudication by this trih.ni. 1. The Lr.mitn.;u :,s ".holv devoid of merit. It is we!! settled that ihough promotion/ upgrada;ion is the m.M'.i'3cr;ul function it :imst \n-i bj on the subjeciive satisfaction of the nirnjge.nenf bui ir:ast be on some objective criteria. The iiianafsrvnt cannot &ct arbi- trarily, Ii i/.ust act fairly and reasor.jb'.y even in the matter of promotion. I f.m cf the opinion th"t the tiibunal is fully competent to cancel unjisst'fisd promoliocs whenever ;t feels that the pessons superseded had been so superseded on a - count of legal malafide or victimisation or unfair ! :bour practice. However, in the present case I am not inclined to interfere with the order of promotion for reasons already ex- pressed.
12. After tuv^a; considered the submissions raised on behalf of the parties my award is that the action of
M. P. SINGH, Piesiding Officer [No. L-19012C56)'80-D,IV(B!} S. S. MEHT \, De^k Officer
Dated : Calcutta, 24th, September, 1982.
S.O. 3708.—Whereas ii appears to the Central Government that the employer and the majority of the employees in relation to '.he establishment known as Messrs Medical Bureau, 1445, ChanJm Chovvk, Delhi-6, have agreed that'the previsions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Pro- visions Act. 1952 (19 or 1952), should be made applicab'e to the said.establishment.
Now therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by si'b-section M) of Section 1 of the said Aft. the Central Government hereby applies the provisions of (he said Ac to the said establishment.
[No. S-35019.176)/82"PF.HJ
3921
S.O Sill -Whereas f ippea to 'he Ccn'nl Gc < nment tJ1 •*• i lt u n j k ur a n' the maj'jiit> "I the emp o' us in sei lion 'i the tsiabl'shment Kiovn as Messrs Cinsallant G'oup 11 OKI Post Oth.e Stieet, Calcntta-1, ha\e aqieed ih u the pro\isions of the Enirlo'--b Provident Hinds pnd Miscellaneous Piovis-ons Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) should be made apilicib'j to ihj said "sfaoli-"hmtnt
NOA, therefore IU axstwse ci the powtrs conierred by subsvtion C4" of Section 1 it the said Act, tht Central Go\ei nment hereby applies the p'ov sions of the said Act to
I \o SifO 17/86 82-PFII]
[No S-35017/63/82-PFin
3922 THE GAZETTT! OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II- SEC. 3(ii)]
S.O. 3716.—Whereas It appears to the Central Govern- ment that the employer and the majority of tho employeei in ichitiiMi to the establishment known us Messrs t);ilo Eqnipmo'i^. 8i-t'J N.urn.il l.ibrarv A\enne, Calcutta- 27 inchiJins i(a Registered Ofilca at 7, Raja Santosh Road, Calcutta-27, have aficcd thai the provisions ot the Emp- loyed' Proviilenl Funds and Misocllaneoui Piovisions Act, 19W (19 of 195J), ihonl ! be made applicable to the said cstnblishmi-nt.
Now, ihernfore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of Sec'ion 1 of the said Act, the Central Gov- rrnment hereby anplies the pro\isions of the said Act to fie sa'd establishmcnl.
[No. S-3?(M7(R7)/82-PF.1I]
S.O. 3714.—Whereas it appears to thu Central Govern- ment that the employer and ihe majority of the employees in relation to the establishment known as Messrs Shiva Finance and Properties (Private) Limited, 2, India h'xebanee Plic,1, Calcutta-1, have agreed that the, puniiions of the Fmployees' Provident Fundi and Mi^cllaneous Pio- visions Act, 1952 (19 of 11/52), s,huidd b-: made applicable lo the said .stablishmenf.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- jection (4) of Section 1 of the said Act, the Central Gov- ernment hereby applies the provisions of the said Act to ihe said establishment.
[No. S-35O17(fi2)/82-PF.nj
3923
S.O. 3717.—Whereas Messrs Tamil Nadu Steels, Arakkonam- 6310O4 (hereinafter referred to as the said establishment) have applied for exemption under sub-section (2A) of sec- tion 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellane- ous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to ns "the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government h satis/led Mat the employees of the said establishment are, without mak- ing any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insurance which arc more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit- Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme);
Now, therefoic, in exercise of the powers conferred by sLib-scciinn (2\) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to Ihr rnnMinrt, s"=cifled in the Schedule annexed hereto, Ihe vii r.il Government hereby exempts the said establishment fiom the operation qf all the provisions of the said Scheme for a nenod of three years.
S50 GI/82-- 8
SCHEDULE
I, The employer in relation to the said establishment shall submit such returns to the Kcfjional Provident Fund Commissioner, Tamil Nadu and maintain such accounts rnd provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct from lime to time
2. The employer shall pay such inspection charges as the Central Government may, from time to time, ditect under clause (a) of sub-section (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month.
3. All expenses involved in the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, submission or returns, payment of insurance premia, trans- fer of accounts, 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 GIOUD Insur- ance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended, afongwith a translation of the salfent featurej thereof, in the language of the majority of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who is already a member of the Employees" Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said -\.t, is employed in his establishment, the employer shnll immediately enrol him FS a memher of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay neces- sary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Cor- poration of India.
6 The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits available to the employees under the Gioup Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the em- ployees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so (hat the benefits available under the Group Insuiance Scheme aie more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7, Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insur- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been coveted under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the d'ffcrence to the legal heir/nominee of the employco ss compensation.
8, No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance Scheme shnll be made without the piior approval of the Rcfiional Provident Fund Commissioner, Tamil Nadu, and where any amendment- is likely to affect adversely the interest of the employees, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner shall before giving his approval, give a rea- sonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9, Where, for any reason, the employees of the estab- lishment do not remain covered under Ihe Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India an al- ready adopted by- the said establishment, or the benefits to (he employees under (his Scheme arc reduced in my man- ner, (he exemp'ion vhall be liable to be cancelled.
JO. Whore, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by ths Life Insuiance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed lo lapse, (he exemption is liable to be cancelled,
11. In case of dcfnult. if any made by the employer in payment of premium the lcsponsibility for payment of assurance benefits to the nominees or the Ieg.il heirs of de- censed memhers who would have been covered under ihe iaid Scheme but for grant of this exemotion, shall be that ot the employer,
12. Upon the deith of the member coveicj under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the slid establishment shill ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/Iep-ni heirs entitled for if and in any <-.-)"• within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India.
[No. S-350UO6)/82-PF. II]
3924 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 (PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
S.O. 3718.—Whereas Messrs H.M.T. Limited (Corporated Head Office and Marketing Division) 36, Cunningham Road, BangaIoie-560052 (hereinafter referred to as the said estab- lishment) have applied for exemption under sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Mis- cellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied Ihtit the employees of the said establishment are without mak- ing any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insurance which .ire more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit- Linked Insurance S-heme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the snid Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-seciion (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establishment from the operation of all the provisions of the "Ftid Scheme for a period of three years.
SCHEDULE
1. The employer in relation to the ajld establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Turni Commissioner, Karnataka and maintain such accounts trnd provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct from time to time.
2. The employer shnll pay such inspection charges as ihe Central Government may, from time to time, direct under clause (a) of sub-section (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month.
3. All expenses involved in Ihe administration of the Group Insurpn^e Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, submission or returns, payment of insurance prcmiu, trans- fer of accounts, payment of inspection charges, etc. shnll be born* by the employer,
3925
4. The employer shall display, on the Notice Board of the establishment, a copy of the rules of the Group Insur- ance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as Ejid when amended, alongwith a translation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the majority of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who ia already i member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, in employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately enrol him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay necei- sary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Cor- poration of India.
6. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits available to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the em- ployees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the benefits available under the Group Insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible tfnder the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insur- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the r.mount th;'t would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the difference to Ihe legal heir/nominee of the employee as compensation.
8. No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the Regional Provident Funj Commissioner, Karnataka and where any amendment in likely to -iffect adversely the interest of the employees the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner shall before giving his approval, .give a iea- sonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9. Where, foi any reason, the employees of the estab- lishment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India ai al- ready adopted by the said establishment, or th; benefits to the employees under this Scheme are reduced in any man- ner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled.
10. Wheie, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default, if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assurance benefits to the nominees or the logal heirs of de- ceased members who would have been co/ored under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer.
12. Upon the death of the member coveicd under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee /legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India.
[No. S-35O14(46)y82-PF-lI]
3 9 26 T HE G A Z E T TE OF I N D IA • O C T O B ER 3 0 , 1 9 8 2 / K A R T I KA 8, 1 9 04
[ P A RT I I —S EC 3 ( i i )]
SO. 3719.—Wheieas Mcssis H MT LimlLd. Machine Tool Division Hjdeiabad 500854 vj.xOinafter referred to as the said establishment) have applied tor exemption under sub-section (2A) ol section 17 of the Employes Piovident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred lo as the said Act);
And whcieas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment are, without making any sepaiate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Gioup Insurance Scheme of the Luc Jnsunmce Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insurance which are more favourable to such employees that thd benefits admjssible under the Employees Deposit- Linked Insurance Scheme, 197^ (.hereinafter referred to a* the said Scheme),
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions -specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Centtal Government hereby exempts the said establish- ment fiom the opciation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years,
SCHEDULE
1 The employer in relation to the said establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commissions, Andhra Pradesh and maintain such accounts and proudc for such facilities foi inspection, as the Central Government may dhect fiom time to time.
2 The employer shall pay such inspection charges "s the Central Government may, from time to time, direct under clause (a) of sub section (3A) of seUion 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month
3 All expenses involved m the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, submission or icturns, payment of msuionce promia, trans- fer of accounto, payment of inspection charges etc ihall be borne by the employer
4 The emploier shall display, on Lhe Notice Board of the establishment, a copy of the rules of the Group Insur- ance S heme as appioved by the Centnil Government and, as and when amendod alongwlth. a translation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the maionlv of the employees
5. 'Where the employee, who is alteady a member of the Employee Provident Fund oi the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately enrol him as a mcii bcr of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay
c S r o n ' rr e 5 p e rt of him to the Life i n s u™
6 The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefit*' available to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the em- ployees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the benefit, available under the Group Insurance Scheme are
Z l ^ t T s a id VcVml emp'OyeeS thm the bCnefitS a d m™b l* 7 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insurance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable undei this scheme be Ies3 than the amount that would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the difference to the legal hen/nominee of the employee as compensation
8 No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur ance Scheme shall be made without lhe pnoi approval of the Regional Provident Fund Commlseioner Andhra Piacteih, and where any amendment is likely to affect adversely the inteiest of the employees, the Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner shall before giving his approval, give .i rcisonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view
9 Where, for any reason, the employees of the establish ment do not lemain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India as already adopted by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employee* under this Scheme are ieduced in an)y manner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled
10 Where, for any reason, the employer fails to pay fh* premium within the due date, a* fixed by the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India, and thr- policy is allowed to lapse, the exsmption is liable to be cancelled
H In case of default, if any made by the employer In payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assurance benefits to the nominees or the legal heirs of de- ceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer
12 Upon the death of the member covered under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal heat, entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insurance Corporation of India
[No S-35014(47)/82-PF II]
3927
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment ate. without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Lite Insurance Corporation oE India in the nature of Life Insurance which are more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit- Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (2A) of section 17 of the snid Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establish- ment from the operation of all the piovisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years.
SCHEDULE
1. The employer in relation \fl the said establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Karnataka and maintain such accounts and provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Cential Government may direct from time to time.
2. The employer shall pay such inspection chaises as the Central Government may, from time to time, direct under clause (a) of sub-section (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the cl.)se of every month.
3. All expenses involved in the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, submission or returns, payment of insurance premia, trans- lcr of accounts, 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 Group Insui- ance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended, alonjjwith a translation pf the salient features thereof, in the language of ths majority of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who is already a member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately enrol- him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay necessary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
6. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits available to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the em- ployees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the benefits available under the- Group Insurance Scheme are rnore favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insurance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than, the amount that would be payable had (he employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the difference to the legal heir/nominee of the employee as compensation.
8. No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the Regional Provident Fiynd Commissioner, Karnataka, and where £ny amendment is likely to affect adversely the interest of the employees, the Regions] Provident Fund Com- missioner shall before giving his approval, give a reasonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9. Where, for any reason, the employees of the establish- ment do not remain covered under the Group In&urance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India a? already adopted by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employee* under this Scheme are. reduced in tny manner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled.
10. Wheie, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Jnsui- ance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to knse the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
' S.O. 3720.—Wheieas Messrs Guest Keen Williams Limited, Sankcy Pressing Division, Rajaji Natj.ir, BangaIore-560010 (KN/2-90), (hereinafter referred to as the said establish- ment) have applied for exemption under sub-section (2AJ of the section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (herein- after lefcircd to JS Ihc s.iid Act)'
11. In case of default, it any mode by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of
3028 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
assurance benefits to the nominees or the legal heirs of de- ceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer.
12. Upon the death of the member covcied under tjie Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
[No. S-35014(72)/82-PF. IIJ
S.O. 3721.—Whereas Messrs Southern Switchgear Limited, P.B. No. 114, Avadi Road. Ambattur Industrial Estate, Madras-600058. (TN/3469) (hereinafter referred to as the said establishment) have applied for exemption under sub- section (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions AU, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment arc, without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insurance which are more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit- Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to a" the said Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establish- ment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years.
SCHEDULE
1. The employer in relation to the said establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Tamil Nadu, maintain such accounts
3929
and provide for such facilities for inspection, at the Central Government may direct from time to time
2 The employer shall pay such ^spection charges as the Cential Government may, from tune to time, direct under clause (a) of sub section (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the clo^e of c\eiy month
3 All expenses involved in the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, submission of leturns, payment of insurance picmia, trans- fer of accounts, 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 Group Insui- ance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended alongwith a translation of the salient features thereof, m the language of the maiority of the employees
5 Where the employee, who is already a member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immedi itely enrol him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and piy necessary premium in respect of him to the Life Intur ince Corporation of Tndia
6 The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits available to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the em- ployees, under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the benefits available under the Group Insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the smi St-heme
7 Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insurance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employei ghall pay the difference to the legal heir/nominee of the employee as compensation
8 No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior approvol of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Tamil Nadu, and where any amendment is likely to affect adversely the interest of the employees the Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner shall befoie giving his approval give a reasonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view
9 Where, for any reason, the employee of the establish- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the life Insurance Coiporation of Tndia as already adopted by the said establishment, or *he benefits to the employees under this Scheme are redu ed m any manner the exemption shall be liable io be cancelled
10 Where for any reason, the employei fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insur- ance Coi poration of India, and the policy is illowed to lapse the exemption is liable to be cancelled
11 In case of default, if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assurance benefits to the nominees or the legal heirs of de- ceased members wfto would have been covered under tht said Scheme but for gram of this exemption, shall be that of the employer
12 Upon the death of the member coveied under the Srneme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured fiom the Life Insurance Corporation of Tndia
[No S-35O14T73) AR2-PF II}
30 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART I I - S EC 3(ii)J
S.O. 3722.—Whereas Messrs Shree Rfun Mills Limited, (M.T.A. Division), Udhna (District Surat) (GJ/449J-A) (here- inafter referred to as- the said establishment) have applied for exemption under sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment are, without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in empyment of benefits under the Group insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corpoiation of India in the nature of Life Insurance which are more favourable to such, employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit- Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government heieby exempts the said establish- ment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years.
SCHEDULE
1. The employer in relation to the i'Jd establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ahmedabad maintain such accounts and provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct from time to time,
2. The employer shall pay such inspection charges as the Central Government may, from time to time, direct under clause (a) of sub-section (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month.
3. All expenses involved in the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, submission or returns, payment of insurance premia, trans- fer of accounts, 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 Group Insur- ance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended, alongwith a translation pf the salient features thereof, in the language of the majority of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who is already a -member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately enrol him us a membar of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay necessary premium in respect Qf him to the Life Insuianco Corporation of India.
6. The employer shall Hrrange to enhance (he benefits available to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropiiately, if the benefits available to the em- ployees under the said Scheme are enhanocd, so that the benefits available under the Group insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.'
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insurance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been Covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the difference to the legal heir/nominee of the employee as compensation.
8. No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance .Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ahmadabad, and where any amendment is likely to affect adversely the interest of the employees, the Rcglona] Provident Fund Com- missioner shall before giving his approval, give n reasonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9. Where, for any reason, the employees of (he establish- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme qf the Life Insurance Corporation of India as already adopted by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employees under this Scheme arc reduced in any manner, the exemption shal] be liable to be cancelled.
10. Where, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default, if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assurance benefit? to the nominees or the legal heirs of de- ceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for jrrnnt of this exemption, shnll be that of the employer.
12. Upon the death of the member covered under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insurance Corporation of Tndia.
[No. S-35014(106)/82-PF. II]
<0.i[
S.O, 3723. -Whereas Messrs industiMl Mvichineiy Manuiac- liters I'vt. limited, Ncai Ahmadabad New Lotion Mills, Oliice Amraiwadi Road, Ahmadahad-N lGJ/671, (heiemafler ieterred lo as the said establishment ba\c uppl.ed toi Memp- tion under sub-section I2A) oi section 1/ ot the l-mployees' Provident funds and Miscellaneous Pnnisions Aci, 1952 (10 of ]V52) (hcrcinaftei nj't;ned lo .is the said Aci)
\ml wheicai, the CenUaJ Government is satisfied that the employees of ilie s,nd e-.ublishr.jent aie, without making any .separate con nbution oi payment of premium, in enjoyment of benelits under the Group Insumnce Sdiemc of the l-ife insurance Coiporation of India in ihc nature of Life Insur- ance which are more favouiable LO such employee lhat Ihe benehis admissible under ihe Employees Deposit-linked Insur- ance Scheme, iy?h (heieinaflci icfened to as the s.nd Scheme);
Now, theieiore, in exccise oi the powers coiifened by sub- kcclion (2A; oi section 17 of the s\.id Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed heieto, the Central Government hereby exempts the s..id establishment iiom the operation of all Uie piovisions uf the said Scheme lor a ueiiod ot" three years.
SCUIiDULh
1. The employer in relation to the said establishment shull submit such leturru to Ihe RejEioniil Provident Fund Com- missioner. Ahmadabad. maintain such accounts and provide for such facilities for inspection, ;>$ the Central (•oxenimcnt may direct from time to lime.
2. The employer shall pay such inspection chaiges at the Ceniial Government may, lroin time to time, diiect under clause (a) of sub-section '3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from Ihe close of every month
3. All expenses involved in the adminisliation of the dii-up Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, sub- mission or itturns, payment of insurance premia, Iransf.1 of accounts payment of inspection chaiges, etc. shall he hi.ino l-y the employer.
4. lhc employer shall display, on the Notice Board ot the establishment, a copy oi' the rules of the Ciioup Tnsui- aiiLC Scheme as approved ty the Central Government apd, a-, and v lien amended, alonewith a tianslation of the salient icatmes tliereof, in the lan^ua^e of Ihe majority of the employees.
'i. Where the employee, who is abeddy a membei ol iho hrr.jiloyee Piovident lumrt oi the Piovident I'und ot an eslablishment exempted under the snid Act, is cmpk>>cd in hi< eslablishmcnt, the employer shall immediately en nl him .is a member of the Gioup lnsinnnct; Scheme and pa} ru-tcs- saij premium in lespect of him to the Life "Insurance ( or- pon-tion of India.
6. Thw emplover shall Hrranue tu enhance tlic benefits bail- able to the employees under the Grojip Insuranc-- SLI cmo appiopriately, if the benefits available to the cmployi.es umier the said Scheme are enhanced, so thai, the benefits av. lable under the Group Insurance Scheme arc more faun liable to the employees than the benefits admissible lindei Uu said Scheme.
K?0 QI/R2- 9
3')32 THE GAZEITE QJ' INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 [PART 11 -SEC. 3(ii)]
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Gioup insur- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less thnn the pmount that would be payable had the employee been cove ed ui
S. No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur-
ance Scheme shall be maJc without the pnor approval of thf Regional Fiovidcnt 1'und Commissioner, Ahmad, bad, and where any amendment is likely to affect ;idvcrsclv the inter- est of the employees, the Regional Piovident Fund Commis- sioner shall before giving his appro/al, #ivc a icasonuble opportunity to the employ.-es to explain their point of view.
9. Where, for any reason, th; employees nf the establish- ment do not remain covered under the Cimup Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India as already adopted by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employees under this Scheme are reduced in any rDaunor, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled,
10. Where for any reasnn, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Tniuiancc Corpotation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, (he exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default, if any made by ihj employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assui- anco benefits to the nominees or the legal heirs of deceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for (jrjnl of this exemption, shall be that of 1he employer.
12. Upon the death of the member covered under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensuie prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of (he receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India.
INo. S-35O14(114)/82-PF-m
3933
S.O. 3724.—Whereas Messrs Pondicbeny Dislilleiics Limited, Pondichcrry-605001 (PC/26), (hereini'.ftei icfened to as ihc said establishment) have applied for exemption unJer_ sub- section (2A) o£ section 17 of the employees Piovidcnt Winds and Miscellaneous Provision;, Act. 1952 (.19 of 1952) (.here- inafter referred to as ihe said Act);
And whereas, the Ccniml Govejnrncnt is satisfied that the employees of the said tVabhstinicnt aic, without milking any sepaiatc contribution oi rnymctyt ot premium, in tnjuvment of benefits under the turnip Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India in tht naluic of Life Insur- ance which are more favourable to such employees that ihs benefits admissible under the Employee;, Deposit-linked Insur- ance Scheme, 1976 (her;in.ilter reteired to as the said Scheme);
Now, theieforc, in exercise of the powers etmfmed by sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establishment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years.
SC1IEDULI;
1. The employer in relation to the swid establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner, Tamil Nadu, maintain such accounts an^. provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct fiom time to time.
2. The emplover shall pay such inspection thaiges as the Central Government may, fiom time to time, diiect under clause (a) of sub-section (3A1 of section 17 of the said Act within 15 days fiom the close of every month.
3. All expenses involved in the ndministiation of the Gioup Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, sub- mission or returns, payment of insurance premia, transfer of accounts, payment of inspection chaises, etc. shall be borne by the employer.
4. The employer shall display on the Notice Boaid of the establishment, a copy of the rules of the Gioup Tnsura-icC Scheme as apptoved by the Central Govcinment and, as anJ when amended, alongwith a translation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the maioiity of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who U already a member of the I-mnloyees' Provident I'und or the Piovident Fund of an establishment exempted undei the said Act, is emplovcd in his establishment, the employei shall immediately enrol him as d member of the Gioup Insurance Scheme and pay necessary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
6. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits available to the employees under the GIOUD Insurance Schema appropriately, if the benefits avail ible to the employees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the benefits available under the-Group Insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Giour Insur- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the difference to the k-qi.il hcii /nominee of (he employee as compensation.
S. No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the 850 GI/32 -10
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Tajn.il Nadu and where any amendment is likely to affect adveisely the inter- est of iht; employees, the Regional Piovident Fund Commis- sioner shall hclore giving his appjcwal, give a reasonable oppoitunity to the employees to explain their point of vittw.
9. Where, for any icason, the employees of the establish- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corpoiation of India as already adop.cd by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employees under this Scheme are reduced in any manner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled.
10. Where, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default, if any made by the employer in payament of piemium the responsibility for payment of assurance benefits to the uomnees or the legal heirs of deceased mcmbeis who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer.
12. Upon the death of the member covered under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the said sstablkhment shall ensure prompt payment of tho sum assured to the nominee/legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insur- rnce Corporation of India.
[No. S-35014(123l/fi2-PF-II]
3934 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
S.O, 372S.—Where;ia Mwssrs Century Cement, P.O. Bai- kunth-493-116, Railway Station Tilda, Distt. Raipur (Madhya Pradesh) (MP/2757) (hereinafter referred to as the said estab- lishment) have applied for exemption undei sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Mis- cellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter leferred to as the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment are, without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insur- ance which are more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit-Linked Insur- ance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme);
Mow, therefote, in exercise of the powers conferred bv sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establishment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a peiiod of three years,
SCHEDULh
1. The employer in relation to the said establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner, Madhya Pradesh maintain such accounts and pro- vide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Govern- ment may direct from time to time.
2. The employer shall pay such inspection charges as the Central Government may, from time to lime, direct under clause (a) of subjection (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month,
3. All expenses involved in the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including maintenance of accounts, sub- mission or returns, payment of insurance premia, transfer of accounts 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 Group Insurance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended, alongwith a translation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the majority of the employees,
5. Where the employee, who is already a member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the saW Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately enrol him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay neces- sary premium in respect of him to the Life Tnsumtu'e Corpo- ration of India.
6. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits avail- able to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the employees under the said Scheme arc enhanced, so that the benefits available under the Group Insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group Insur- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the e.nployee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay (he difference to the legal heir/nominee of the employee as compensation.
8. No amendment of the provisions of the Gioup Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Madhya Piadcsh and where any amendment is likely to affect adversely the interest of the employees, the Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner shall before giving his approval, giv4 a reasonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9. Where, for any reason, the employees of the esablish- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India as already adopted by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employees under this $cheme are reduced in any manner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled.
10. Where, for any reason, the employer fail? to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default, if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assur- ance benefits to the nominees OT the legal heirs of deceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption shall be that of the employer.
3935
12. Upon the death jf the member covered under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the mid establishment shall cnsuie prompt payment of Lhc sum aasuiud to the nominee/legal heirs entitled for it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insu- rance Corporation of India,
[No. S-35014U24J/82-PF.1J1
S.O. 3726 -Wheieas Messrs Indian Oxygen Limited, 66 Ndjiifgaih Road, P.B. 6203, New Delhi-110015 (DL/128), (.hereinafter referred to as the said establishment) have applied for exemption under sub-secljon (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Piovident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is s>atisfied that the employees of the said establishment are, without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment ol benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corpoiation of India in the nature of Life Insur- ance which are more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit-Linked Insur- ance Scheme, 1976 (hcreinafier referred to as the said Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2A) of section 17 of the suid Act and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establish- ment from the operation of all the, provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three yean.
SCHEDULE
1. The employer in I elation to the soid establishment shall submit such returns to tbc Regional Provident Fund Com- missioner. Delhi, maintain such accounts and provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct from time to time.
3936 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KART1KA 8, 1S04 [PART IT - S I X. 3(ii)]
2. The employer shall pay such inspection charges as the Central Government niHy, from time to time, direct under clause (a) of sub-section (.1 A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month.
3. AH expenses involved in the admimsliation of the Gioup Insurance {scheme, including maintenance ol accounts, sum- mission or returns, payment of msurin:e premm, transfei of accounts payment ot uibpection charges, etc, shall be borne by the employer.
4. The employer shall display, on the Notice Board of the establishment, a copy of the mles ot the Gump Insur- ance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended, alongwith a tianslation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the majority of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who is already a member of thj Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund oi an establishment exempted under the said Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately emol him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay neces- sary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Cor- poration of India.
,
6. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits available to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the employees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the beneiits avail- able under the Group Insurance Scheme Hie more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Group I n s t- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amouni payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall pay the diffeicncc to the legal heir/nominee of the employee a', compcnsalion.
8. No amendment of the provisions of the Gioup Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior uppioval of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi, and whcie any amendment is likely to affect adversely the inteicst of the employees, the Regional Puvident Fund Commissioner shall before giving his approval, give A reasonable opportunity to the employees to explain tlieir point of view.
9. Where, for any reason, the employees of the establish- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India as alrca.ly adopted by the said establishment, or th^ benefits to the employees under this Schema are reduced in any mannci, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled,
10. Where, for nny icason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insuiance Corpoiation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, th- cxemption is liable to be cancelled,
11. In case of default, if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assur- ance benefits to the nominees or the legal hrirs of deceased members who would have been coveied under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer.
12. Upon the death of the member covered under the -Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured :o the nominoe/legal heirs entitled foi it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assured from the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India.
[No, S. 35014d36)/82-PF.ir|
[PART I l - S nc 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 3937
S.O. 3727.—Wheieas Messis New Shairock Mills (Division or Maftalal Industries Ltd,) Asurwa Road, P.B. No. 2006, Ahmedabad-380016 (GJ/362) (hereinafter teferred to as the said establishment), have applied foi exemption under sub- section (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provicions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952; (here- in after referred to as the said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment are, without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefiLs under the Group Insurance Scheme ot the Life Insurance Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insur- ance which are more favourable to such, employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit-Linked Insur- ance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of th© povvers conferred by sub-section (2A) of section. 17 of tho said Ac: and subject to the conditions specified in the Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts the said establish- ment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years.
SCHEDULE
1. The employer in relation to the said establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commis- sioner, Ahmedabad maintain such accounts and provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct from time to time.
2. The employer shall pay such inspection charges as the Central Government may, from time to time, direct under clause (a) of sub-section GA) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month.
3. All expenses involved in the adminislMtlon of the Group Insuiance Schelne, including maintenance of accounts, sub- mission or lelurns, payment of insurance prcmia, transfer of accounts payment of inspection charges, etc. shall be boine bv the employer.
4. The employer shall display, on the Notice Board of the establishment, a copy of ihc rules of the Group Insurance Scheme as approved by the Central Government and, as and when amended, ulongwith a translation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the majority of ihe employees.
5. Where the employee, who is already a member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Provident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, is cmployd in his establishment, tha employer shall immediately cmol him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay neces- sary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Cor- poration of India.
6. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits avtiil- .able to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the employees under the said Scheme arc enhanced, so that the benefits available under the Group Insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Gioup Insur- ance Scheme, if on the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Scheme, the employer shall puv the difference to the legal heir/nominee of the, employee as compensation.
8. No amendment of the provisions of the Group Insur- ance Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Ahirmdabad, and where any amendment is likely to affect adversely the inter- est of the employees, the Regional Provident Fund Commis- sioner shall befoie giving his approval, give n reasonable opportunity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9..Where, for any reason, *ke employees of the eilabli&h- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India as already adopted by the said establishment, or the benefits to the employees under this Scheme are reduced in any manner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled.
10. Where, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default, if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assur- ance benefits to the nominees or tin legnl heirs of deceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer.
12. Upon the death of the member covered under th$ Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal heirs entitled far it and in any case within 7 days of the receipt of the sum assuied from the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India,
(No. S-35G14(144)/82-PF.II]
3938
S.O. 37M.—Whereas Messrs Cement Corporation of India Limited, New Delhi (DL/2227), thereinafter referred to as the said establishment) have applied for exemption under sub- section (2A) of section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. 1952 (.19 of 1952J (here- in after referred to as tho said Act);
And whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the employees of the said establishment are, without making any separate contribution or payment of premium, in enjoyment of benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme of the J-ife Insurance Corporation of India in the nature of Life Insur- ance which are more favourable to such employees that the benefits admissible under the Employees Deposit-Linked Insur- ance Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- tection (2A) of section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in (he Schedule annexed hereto, the Central Government hereby exempts ihe said establishment from Ihe operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme for a period of three years.
SCHEDULE
1, The employer in i elation to th" said establishment shall submit such returns to the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi, maintain such accounts and provide for such facilities for inspection, as the Central Government may direct from time to time.
2. The employer shall pay such inspection charges as the Central Government may, from time to time, direct undtr clause (a) of sub-section (3A) of section 17 of the said Act, within 15 days from the close of every month.
3. All expenses involved in the administration of the Group Insurance Scheme, including; maintenance of accounts, sub- mission or returns, payment of insurance piemia, transfer of accounts, 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 tho rulas of the Group Insurance Scheme as approved by th= Central Government and. as mid when amended, alongwith a translation of the salient features thereof, in the language of the majority of the employees.
5. Where the employee, who is already a member of the Employees' Provident Fund or the Piovident Fund of an establishment exempted under the said Act, is employed in his establishment, the employer shall immediately enrol him as a member of the Group Insurance Scheme and pay neces- sary premium in respect of him to the Life Insurance Cor- poration of India.
fi. The employer shall arrange to enhance the benefits -ivailable to the employees under the Group Insurance Scheme appropriately, if the benefits available to the employees under the said Scheme are enhanced, so that the benefits available
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 30, 1982/KARTIKA 8, 1904 3939
under the Group Insurance Scheme are more favourable to the employees than the benefits admissible under the said Scheme.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Oioup Insur- ance Scheme, if oc the death of an employee the amount payable under this scheme be less than the amount that would be payable had the employee been covered under the said Schme, the employer shal lpay the diffidence to the legal heir/nominee of the employee as compensation.
8. No amendment of fhc provisions of the Group Insurance Scheme shall be made without the prior approval of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner. Delhi, and where any amendment is likely to aircct davetsely the interest of the employees, the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner shall before giving his approval, give a reasonable opportu- nity to the employees to explain their point of view.
9. Where, for any reason, the employees of the establish- ment do not remain covered under the Group Insurance Scheme of the Life Insurance Corporation of India as already adopted by_ (he said establishment, or the benefits to the the employees under this Scheme are reduced in any manner, the exemption shall be liable to be cancelled.
10. Where, for any reason, the employer fails to pay the premium within the due date, as fixed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India, and the policy is allowed to lapse, the exemption is liable to be cancelled.
11. In case of default ,if any made by the employer in payment of premium the responsibility for payment of assur- ance benefits to the nominees or the legal heirs of deceased members who would have been covered under the said Scheme but for grant of this exemption, shall be that of the employer.
12. Upon th death of the member covered under the Scheme, the employer in relation to the said establishment shall ensure prompt payment of the sum assured to the nominee/legal "heirs entitled for it and in nny case within 7 days of the receipt of rhe sum assured from the Life Insur- ance Corporation of India.
New DJhi, iL- ] Uh Oc'.ober, 1982 1948) nominated Dr. P. U. Abubackcr, Director of Insut- ance Medical Services, Government of Kerala, Trivendrtim to lepiesent that State on the Medical Benefit Council in place of Dr. loseph ZUUIUIMS ;
Now, therefore, m puisuunce of Sub-section (1) of sec- tion 10 of the employees State Insurance Acl, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Ccntial Government hereby makes the lollow- ing amendment in the not.licjtion of the Government of India in the Ministry of Laboui No. S.O. 3329, dated 19th November, 1981, n&mely ; --
In the said notification, under the headinjt "(Nominated by the State Governments concerned under clause (d) of sub-section (.1) of section 10)" for the entry against item 12, the following entry shall he substituted, namely :—-
"Dr. p. U. A'mojcVer Director of Insurance MeiK'il Eervicej, Government of Kerala, Trivandrum-14."
[No. U-16012/3/S2-HI]
S.O. 3730.—Whereas the State Government .of Hijiia- chal Pradesh has, in pursuance of clause (d) of section 4 of the Employees' State Ituuiance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) nominated Sim R. K. Anand, Commissioner-cum-Secretary to the Government o!' Hni.i.fiii F u l t sh >o represent that St.ite on the Employee*1 Stale Insurance (. iy potation, in place of Shn 1, K. Sun;
Now, therefore, in purs.i moe of section 4 of the emp- loyees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948), the Central Government hereby nrdkea the foil nving amendment in the notification of the Government of Ind.j in the Ministry of Labour No. 850(E), dated the 21st October, 1980, name- ly :• -
In the said notifica'ion, under the beading "(Nominat- ed by the Stale Gi vcrnrrcnu uvider clause (d) of section 4)", for the entry against Serial Num- ber 13, the folk'ving entry shall he substitu*"d, rainely ; —
"Shri R. K. ANAND, Commissioner-cura-Se.'retary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Labour tmd F/vployruent Depvrraen', Simla "
PRINTED BV THE MANAOER, OOVT. OF INDIA PRESS, RING ROAD, NEW DELHI-110064
AND PUBLISHED BY THE CONTROLLER OF PUBLICATIONS, DELHI-110054. 1 9 82
- , cf t%? c!erks trarrfeiTed on admiriistrrti\e irrovrd. On tfle c^nt rcry the rules cf ceniorify lai(j down <;reik t' tfr",h ."f"entlv Th.erefo e thjus'i th^ro L a refe,;nce *n t!'e po!i:v dec- irn i; is no* to b-'tinpolicy drcision of tb° Eirk bnt it h *be ci ci'pr v^-M"!i i ! '-" t^v 's t"> co\cm t'"e ""-r;'s of t''e I'fceappointed az Telex Operrtor and fur- ther it ircp'Ldiy sug^cted, since the test was laid down, that who amongst the candidates wcu'd be more "'of l- cVnt H"ci'Id g t th^ say pfKt \^hich as already indicated carrier 'viib it cpccial alloivance which allowance bei -'. B" dep i\ing the post of Te'e\ Operetor, r.n impre sicn is liVeiy to be created thonsh the oHcr does not sueak as su;h that because of inefficiency and i^crmpc- tency he lost the said post. "1. Normally, all allowance pests go by seniority unlcs there is something adverse agair<.t fsuch as mon! tuupitude of mLconduct of any sort for which action is taken and punishment awarded) or vronp with (that is, inherent inefficicnev or phyical dis- ability) the person concerned, of he is unwilling to take the post. For this purpos;, senioritv to be considered is seniority at the branchjdivisional offlce|central office and any allowance post per- taining to P cadre is to be allotted to the senior most person in that cadre, unless, as stated abo\e there is something adverse again«t|wrong with sfch person or he is unwilling to tak» the pon. Senio- rity at the branchlDivisienal 0ffice|O^tial Office is to be decided on the ba^is of th" d'lte of ioin- inq at the branch |Divisioral Office [Central Office, subject to the following qualification^." There are subsfqusnt paragraphs which s-r-ak of tranter on request etc; but since in trip prettni ca*2 admittedly fhe transfer of Shri Wagh and Kolhatkar vsre on admirKtrative ground, not the subwjrient paragraphs but paragraph ntrabe' 1 which voulj govern the satire care. Th& ven' opening word of the paragraph 1 "Normally" indicates that unless The Bank has *iitd to induct Section: 9A of the Fndu^Hal Di-putes- Act, 1947 in support of (he change conte-nplat-d. Serticn 9\ cf the Act never vtcuJd f» attrjctuJ. The r*dv e1ce an'l deprive a r - ' ^ ci °f *h-i lepi'imnt- n'-»ht which the Pnnk ca" ne-.er be al'oved. Th» cleik -e mirt be he'I fo be entitled to continue to hild that r.« t <"on f-oti 11-9-19P0 If >ht Bank is nrt a position to five him t^at po^' b-"i>"se the " i 't K aUeadv Irld by scnfboJv d-e, the on'v reliefs which Shri Wash wculd be entitled is to eet the aHowapce wh-ch ©^henvise he wn-uld have been entitled to as ri TCIOT Ope- rator whether he worked in that po-t or not It was not his ↩
- " in V-^s of n v ccn*"3rs the ri&h cf pron^ ty. Aftei cic^iiijr such inpressinn, ths te't wag he'd and a partcula" r:rson with more proficistffiy wac nppointed, flzre afiin the Bank would not be fllow^d to deoart from the ru'es i"ip!'e llv laid devn and *?'*)ri\e a re ron of tho ben^fi's grin-' v ib 0:-- vci. H"we\e", it is not the prone;?ncy alrne v,hich has allowed Shii Wagh to ret the po«t but even if the rul° of seniority is n-p'ied eve* fh-n it r Shri Wach vho must jet the Pest cf Tele-" Op2ra*or and not Shri Kolhatkar 10. As the facts stand the solution of the dispute depend- ed upon the interpretation of the Circular dated 5-8-1974 which is at serial number 10 produced by the Union. Para- graph 1 of the said circular reads as follows :— 53. Ths circul sr itcelf cavs that if a particuk,' person is found not fit for thv> n et th^n alone he should be depiiv- c 1 of th; 'aid po ↩
- te-pcsiinn ol" Shri W;;gh ns Tcl'-x Ope- rator. Whether lie i reputed or not Shri Waph shrill con- tinue to dravv the special rJlownnce. On repestinc he shall Invc t0 work ir the post of Telex Operator to convert the said post. Award is made accordingly. No order as to costs. vp A. DESHPANDE, Presides Officer, Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal No, 2, Bombay. [No. L-12012(129)|8I-D. IKA)] (2) Facts lendinjt upto the present dispute are as follows : The Management is the State Bank of India, Madras lepresert- ted by the Secretary and Treasurer, State Bank of India, Loral Head Office, First line Beach, Madras. The reference made by the Government of India, Ministry of Labour relates to (IiL' action of the Management-Bank in disrhaiyinij Thru P. Mtilhukiishmin from the services of the Bank wi.h effect from 14-4-1969. Thiru P. Muthukrisiman WJS appointed as Official-in-chaii?e at Nvmgambakkam Pay Office of ihe Manage- ment-Bank. vjV, state Bank of India on 1-10-19G6. On 23-8-1967, a show cause notice WJS issued to him containing fo,ir instances of misconduct (Ex. M-l), to which he had sub- mitted his explanation on 8-9-1967, (Ex. M-2). Apparently the M'inagement-Bank was not satisfied with the explanation cffc.cd and therefore four chajges were framed apainst the workman Thiru P. Mulhukrishnan on 27-9-1967 fl£x M-3). These had been cxtrated even in the judgement of the Division Bench of our High Couit dated 16-7-1982. It luns as follows : SO. —In pjiMiance of section 17 of the Industrial DiMMitci Act 10-17 ntr:>l Govern- ment Tnrhstnni Tribn>i;>1 Midn-s in tne industrial dilute between the e^nloyi* s in elation to the management of Mate Rank of In ↩
- me fresh charges ETid conduct the p ojw.'ir •> c!> no-•••>." Therefore, in the in this contention cf learned counsel for Management Thiru Sanjay Mohan. (6) Finally learned counsel for Management Th;>u San'ay Morrn also submitted that Section 11-A of the Industrial D'sputes Act, 1947 would not come into play in this ease. Section 11-A reads rs follows : (7) F-e I cone ' 'c, I would like to r>ention thnt after the o'^er of rcr>ar>d made by the Single P.ench, all the docu- rrrnts exh-'bifel before this Tribunal except Exs. M-l to M-13 were me'ved b"ck f-om the High Court, and this Tri- bunrl has bee* inforrp'r,!; the H;r;h Court »o send the re mim- ing riocurrvnli;. \Sv,, pA S. A--I-1 to M-13. Meanwhile the Writ Appeals were also filed nrd when the documents were sent fro-- fh;s Tribunal it v,"«-,xhopointed out that Exs. M-l to M-13 sent bv ihh T^bi-na! to the High Court had not been received b> \ ^y th^ T ' i h n - I. The H'gh Court in the commnnicp'Vn d-^'i 21-7-1980 has a'so informed this Tri- bi'nal th?i 'F, f'-l to M '3 in I.D No 431)974 on your file, submitted f^r -• .f-r—.'- ii W.P. 2384(76, "on the file of the Hlsh Court, Mrclras, are being searched for and the simp w'" i" t-an'm't'M as soon PS th=y are rraced m 1h;s Registry."' Af>r the Writ Appeals were disposed of and ord-r of -h* r>;..\-on Bor-h wr-s recelve-i bv thk Tribunal, thi« TribmM h • -,!« V.,-K»ri to ihe H:ah Co-irt thit Fxs. M-l to M-13 -r no' 'reived back. However, the absence nf Exs M'-! ^ Af-13 f^e< no! in ?nv way stand m the wny of hPT'r» of !H d!\r>i!\- be-aiK-e leirned counsel for work- a tvr'o s-' '> Mi ()T")nT>rj*s inr'usive of Exs. M-l to M-13 T i ':V ^d hr'" '"""'' •' '*" hp Mp-n??«"erit represented" by M's. King S. Pj"tndg2, Advocates. (S) Tn t^- r^c;,tf -n Awn-' is ra^ed hold'ng that tlie "11A. Powers of Labour Courts. Tribunals and National Tribunal to give appropriate re ief in cace of d:s- charge or dismiss '! of workmen.—Where rn indus- trial dispute relating to the disch'uge nr d; m'=?ai of a workman has been referred to a" T aborr Omr Tribunal or National Tribunal for adiudirnHon and, in the course of the adjudication p-oceedsnr's the J-abou- Court, Tribunal or Na':nr>i1 Tribunal, as the case may be. is satisfied th't the order of di-- chaige or dismissal was not iuslified ir if rrry, by it' award, set aside the order of d'Vhp-pe or dismissal and direct reinstatement of tb.2 wrrVnvn on such terms and conditions, if anv. ~s ;f th'nK fit, or give su^h other relief to the w o r k e r, irrl'-'d'ng the award of ?ny lesser pun-'shment in li?n of dfr- chirge or dismiss ↩
- ! as the circumstances of the c se may require; Provided that in any proceeding under this section the Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, as Th-n P. Miit^iVn-hn-n fm^ ibe services of the BnnV with rffe-t from 14-4,1969 is n"in-tifl?d PRd that in as imrh as the workrn-n is found enilty of "minor misconduct" under pangrsph 52!(fi}'c) of the Sastry Award i.nd the punishment ↩
- ••• r-*'ve»-i th emrloyers ;T re'ation. to the marngerrent of Kr'e'-fmar Uvre^ove M'ne of Bokaro S*eel limitel, anl tii"'- w n V 's r-rrespnt d th-o.jgh 'he Cho >na M"zdoo- Con- gress, Shram Dhim, Kymore. District Jabalpur (M.P.) and 'h? i v,o-\ -nen vhich was received by this Ministry on fth Octobe-. !9S2. P. Muthukrishnan, dismissing the rppeal. (CODJ) Fx. M-n/30-1-70—Lette*- from rhiru P. Muthuk,Khfv>n to the- Se ref~>ry and Trea^irer of the Bank on the decis;on of the Appellite Authority (< o~>y) B FrOj ?^ JUSTICE SHRI S R. VYAS (RFTD.) PRESID- ING O~FTrFR PFNTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TP'B'JNAL-CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR (M.P.) Crsc No. CGIT/LC(RK24)/1981 Ex. M-14—Demand Draft purchase rcister for the period from 28-3-64 to 29-6-66. (register) P ARTIES : Ex. M-15—Deroend Draft purchase register for the period Employers ;n relation to the Kuteshwar Limestone M'ine from 1-7-66 to 17-5-67. (Register) of Bokaro Steel Limited ↩
- *; Sri Alexis Kujur J^kru s Jojo S - i N wl L-il Muirs Joj J M. Thank ch 'ad Cjm. Oporutor Accountant Elect. Helper Smt. Jarli W/o Lichhannn Sm'.Birshi W/o SJmi Sri Jmikii S/o L ink i -do- Miner - l o- Khalasi Munshi TR.W. Minei - J o- J ;3jph 3u-Ki S/o JohanBirla Kirtik Goud S/o SriJhai Goud Sn Sinkir Birik Sri Bhubiui Achary.i S/oH'ri A;haiyj Smt.Belum Mu.ida Bijoy Muridi Sri L'-il Singh. S/o Btiekro -do- -do- -do - -do- D'lult' S/o B LSU Sri Piues S/o Ishak -.lo- H w\ Holer - d o- T.R.W. -do- Smt. Ful Singh D/o Mol inii Smt J i rj D/o R'jpnmh Sn Molvin S/oDandKi Smt. SLIIO Smt.Budhiini W/o Sukro Smt. SLIIO W/o R itiwm Smt. G^ndci W/o Guutidui Smt. Rimduluri W/o Gobinda Sri Albish Kerkatta Ptimp Operator Sri Snnus Minor .-do- AWARD H '-n 1 Holer 2. The case of the second-pai ty workmen may be briefly stated thus :— T.R.W. 153. Smt. BAIU W/'' MigVio Sri Mukhana S/o Mangn Sri Lukiih S/o Joseph SriD">nicl S/o S">rru Sri Hiri S/o Ledhw Sri Albish S/o Birsha Sri Sukhdcv S/o Kifid'iyal IlandVHoIdor 159. T.R.W. 160. Hmd Holer 161. Smt.R*il S/o Diniel Sri Et iw S/o B.ilo Sri Ban I S/o Lnchh'm'ii T.R.W. 162. Sri Dasrath S/o K-ir^mday .1 -do- 163. Smt. Giindi W/o Knram'liyal The second-party members weie pcunnncnt workmen rnder the first-party miinugement, which was a contiactor at Punjna- pani Lime Slonc and Dolomiie Quarry of Rouikeb Steel I'lant of ihc Steel Authority of India Limited. It is aveired hat the Administrator of the Socitty placed the workmen under suspension with alFect irom 8-1-1972 in his letter dated 23-3-72. 1 hereafter no order wai passed lor vacation of iho suspension order, nor liny chjiges frame nor any domestic enquiry conducted against the woikmcn. The management also did not pay any subsistence allowance to the workmen sus- pended, It is contended that 'he action of -the fltst-party management is motivated and illegal. It is prayed that the workmen me entitled to reinstatement in service with full back wages. ↩
- Board. That request was accepted by the management and Ram Chabila Roy (vas examined by the Area Medical Board also called the 'A«c Detcimination Committee'. Ha was found to be aged 60 yeais old on 28th June, 1979 -wd^ 12\l. M-17. Ram Chabilu Roy did not appeal against \hi decision of the Area Medical Boafd and hence he did not get himself examined by the Appellate Medical Board of the Headquatters at Sancton i.i Hospital. In form B register* (E\ts, M-4 and M-5) which aie maintained under liic .ifiric^ Act, Ram Chabila Roy is shown ttT be born in 1919. So ihc opinion of The" Area Medical Board tally's with that of Hum B legisters. He was also issued photo identity cmJs (E\ts M-3 and W-2) to be letaincd in his possession contain- ing particular;, including his u^e. Thcro also his yeai of birth is 1919 that is the same ns recorded in Form B registers. All these documents cleaily show that his year of birth "wa^ 1919. The Union cvumiiud U. M, Tewari as WW-I and he had deposed thnt Ram Chabila Roy and Naginn. Roy are brothers and that Ram Chabila Roy is younger by (hre* years to his brother Nagina Roy. Ram Chabila Roy. ha* examined himself as WW-2 and he also has deposed (hall he is younger by three years to his brother Nagina Roy It appeals that in his petition to the management dt. 14/23 1-chiuaiy 1979 Ram Chabila Hoy has stated he was younger to his brother by five years. Any way, an argument is built upon this oral evidence that Ram Chabila Roy should be held three years younger to hii brother Nagina Roy and if it be so held he stall continue in service till 1984. Tn my opinion, the argument Is huilt in the air. AND 'I heir Workmeu PRESENT : Mr. Justice M. P. Singh—Pi esidjn3 Offlcei APPEARANCES : On behalf of Employe) s—Mr. B. N. Lala, Advo:ale. On behalf of Workmen—Mr. S K. Mazumdar, A-Kocme STATI-. . West Bangui INDUSTRY • Codl AWARD By its Ordei No. L-19012(40)/79-D.lV(B) dated 21 Feh- rnnry I9S0 the Government of India Ministry of labour. 4. The documentary evidence read with the opinion of the Area Medical Board cannot be thrown out on the basis of this imaginary contention, Ram Chabila Roy himself admitted in cross-examination thjt his JIRC had been recorded in the register by the company as well as by the Government after nationalisation. He also admitted in his evidence in cross- examination that he had undergone medical examination at the Aiea office. There is no document in support of tho rno* of the Union thai Ram Chabila Roy was born in nny other year than 1919. On behalf of the workman it was .irsued that the s.iryr year of birth, i,c. 1919 is recorded in the two refiistert of B foim and also in tlu vrvice cards in th • case of both thf hroihcis and that this crn,n-r be possible, 'n my opinion it is not a good ground to throw away all ihe documentary evidence aforesaid. Ram Chabila Roy entered into contract of service under the company as well as in the, manflge~len.< ↩
- In paia^mph 4 of the wiitten stnterronl the Union says th it it is then positive case that the management had violated their promotion policy and the cadre-scheme framed bv them bv issuing Office Ordei dated 5th July 1974 iF\t. P" 1-7) inWiing appli- cations 'for appeal me in tire trade lest. lp paru.rra.ph 5 also of the written .statement the Union speaks about Ihe promotion policy/cadie scheme fiamed bv the management and says thai it was totally ignored by 'he ni imgement In paragraph 7 of the written 'tatemcnl ih^ union said that if the management had followed their own piomotson policy/ cadre-scheme Sri B. K. Kundu, the Senior most Junion Steno- grapher would ha\c been piomoted to the post of Seniot 7. It was next urged that there was no po;t of PA lying vacant in the Calcutta ollicc of BCCL lo which Mr. Das could be appointed oi posled and that the post of PA which was cifistinn earlier in this oilicc was abolished from lsl Tamiiry. 1975 Refeience in this connection was made to the Tripartite Settlement dated 3rd Apiil, 1975 (Ext. W-l). Coun-cl also points out that the Cadrc-scheme/Promotion Policy, E\t W-2 did not piovide for any post of PA. The contention is not valid. The post of PA did exist in the Cal Titln office of BCCL .is per ngicemcnt dated 23id April, 1975 It is also admitted by the workmen that theie wai srii h a post. The only contention is that it was abolished. There is misconception about it. Only the particular scale of p,,\ and not the post of PA was abolished from 1st Janu- ai\ 1 L>75 and another pay scale was substituted in ,'ts place. Sec cluisc 7 (if Annexurc IA of the Settlement (Ext. W-l). The settlement provides the channel of nromotion from Tunio Stenographer to PA and fiom PA to Senior PA. Mr. Das w,., designated (not promoted) as PA on his prayer in ttims (if the tripartite settlement dated 23rd April, ]975 vhkh was applicable l0 him atnl this was donr without giv- mg him nnv monetary benefit or change of scale of pa\. It seems that the two posts, namely, that of Senior Steno- grapher find that of PA were treated ai equal Or identical for the puipose of channel of promotion fiom Junior Steno- ↩
- , have dgn*ed that the mo is is of the Lmpioyees' Prov'deit ! unc's .nd Miscel'jneoi •• Piovisions V«.t, 1952 (19 of 1952), should be made rpoliviHe to tht sa d ts ab- lishment Nt<¥, th^iefoie in exeiuss ol the poweis uml lrul bj t hereby applies the piovisions of the «d'd Act to the s ud establishment SO 3710.—Whereas it apreais to the Central Government that the employer and the majority of the emplo>te>- m iela- non to the establishment known a Afessis N D Pa el, 119 Bombay Talkies Compound, Malad (West), Bomb >y-64, ha\e agreed that the piovisions of the Employees Piovident Furies and Miscellaneous Piovjsions A.U. 1952 (19 of 1952) should be made applicable to the said estab! shme'it Now, therefore in exetuse of the powers (.obteutd b\ sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the said Act, the Cential Government heieby applies the piovisions of the said Act to the said establishment. [Ni S 35018/S9/82-PF 111 SO. 3713.—Whereas it appears to the Cential Government th .t the employer and 'he majoiity of the employees in rcation to the establishment known as Messis Gupta Chow- diiuiy Ghosh and Company, 8-'B, Chownnghte Lane, Colcutta-16, have agreed that the provisions of the Employees' Piovident Funds and Miscellaneoas Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), should be made apph-Tible to the said esUbl sh- ment Now, therefore in exer^ibe of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby applies the piovis'oi's of the said Act to the said establishment [No S-35017/61 /82-PF.II] ↩
- , and Miscellaneous Fiovisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1912), should bo made applicable to tho 'aid establishment. Now, therefore, in eveicise of the powers conferred by sub- section (A) of Section 1 of the sriid Act, the Central Gov- ernment hereby applies the provisions of the said Act ti- the said establishment. [No. S-35O17(85)/82PF.I1] ↩
- ' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of ru. 16012/13 /82-H1J A. K. BHATTARAI, Under Secy. ↩