jkti=] fgekpy

jkti=] fgekpy

jkti=] fgekpy

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k

izns'k

izns'k

izns'k

fgekpy

fgekpy

fgekpy

fgekpy izns'k jkT; 'kklu }kjk izdkf'kr

izns'k jkT; 'kklu }kjk izdkf'kr

izns'k jkT; 'kklu }kjk izdkf'kr

izns'k jkT; 'kklu }kjk izdkf'kr

f”keyk]

f”keyk]

f”keyk]

f”keyk] 'kqØ

'kqØ

'kqØ

'kqØokj

okj

okj

okj 26 vxLr

vxLr

vxLr

vxLr] 2011

2011

2011

2011@4 Hkknzin

Hkknzin

Hkknzin

Hkknzin] 1933

1933

1933

1933

fgekpy izns'k

fgekpy izns'k

fgekpy izns'k

fgekpy izns'k ljdkj

ljdkj

ljdkj

ljdkj

LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-2 , the 18th August,2011

No. Sharm (A) 7-1/2005 (Award).—In exercise of the powers vested in him under section

17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, the Governor Himachal Pradesh is pleased to order the

publication of awards announced by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court Shimla of the following

cases on the website of Labour & Employment Department:-

Sr.No.

Case No.

Title of the Case

Date of Award

1.

27/2007

S/Sh. Udho Ram Vs M.C.Shimla,.

31-05-2011

2.

1O5/2009 Rajesh Kumar Vs M/S Pyasamid Electronic Parwanoo.

03-06-2011

3.

55/2007

Lekh Ram Vs I&PH Arki Distt. Solan.

30-06- 2011

4.

12/2009

Gurcharan Vs Xen HPSEB Nalagarh.

30-06- 2011

5.

58/2009

Mohinder Singh Vs S.R.Forginh Ltd, Barotiwala.

30-06- 2011

6

11/2011

Workers Union Vs M/s Line chemicals ltd. Pointa Sahib.

01-07- 2011

By order,

Sd/-

ACS ( Labor & Employment).

108&jkti=@2011&26&8&2011

¼2487½

2488

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

Ref.11/2011

Line Chemical Workers Union V/s Line Chemical Ltd P/sahib.

1,7,2011:-

Present:- Sh.Surinder Singh President and Sumer Singh, Secretary for petitioner Union.

Sh. Rahul Mahajan , Advocate for the respondent.

The petitioner union has entered into a settlement with the respondent company. The

settlement has been registered and copy of settlement Ex.C-1 has been placed on record which is

admitted to be true and correct by the president and Secretary of the union. The president and

Secretary have made statement for withdrawal of the reference inview of the settlement, so., the

reference is answered accordingly and the petition stands disposed of . Let a copy of this award be

sent to the appropriate government for publication in the official gazette. File, after completion be

consigned to records.

Announced: 1-7-2011.

Sd/-

Presiding Judge,

Labour Court, Shimla.

__________

IN THE COURT OF D.K SHARMA, PRESIDING JUDGE, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT, SHIMLA, (H.P).

Ref No. 12 of 2009.

Instituted on. 16.3.2009.

Decided on 30.6.2011.

Gurcharan Singh S/o Shri Kaura Ram R/o Village Sekadi, P.O Jaghon, Tehsil Nalagarh,

District, Solan, H. P.

. . Petitioner.

Vs.

The Senior Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, HPSEB Nalagarh, District Solan, H. P.

…Respondent.

Reference under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

For petitioner :- Shri R.S Thakur, Advocate.

For respondent :- Shri Chandan Goel, Advocate.

AWARD

The following reference has been received from appropriate government for adjudication:

““Whether the termination of services of Shri Gurcharan Singh s/o Shri Kaura Ram,

workman by the Senior Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, HPSEB Nalagarh,

District Solan, HP, w.e.f. 25.12.2001 without complying the provisions of Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 is proper and justified? If not, what relief of service benefits and

amount of compensation, the above aggrieved workman is entitled to.”

2489

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

1.

It is averred that the petitioner was engaged as a beldar by the respondent on 26th

July, 1993. The petitioner has completed 240 days in a calendar year for the application of section

25-F and 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, the services of the petitioner were

terminated on 20.8.1999 and therefore the petitioner filed an OA No. 12 of 2000 which was

allowed by the Learned Administrative Tribunal on 5th October, 2001 with the directions to

reengage the petitioner and with benefit of seniority but without back wages. The services of the

petitioner were again terminated on 25.12.2001 without complying the provisions of Industrial

Disputes Act. It is also alleged that while dispensing with the services of the petitioner, the

principle of last come first go was also not followed.

2.

The claim is opposed by the respondent on the grounds that the petitioner was initially

engaged as beldar on 13.5.1993 and worked as such upto 20.7.1999 with certain interruptions and

abandoned the duty. The petitioner was never regular in his duties. The respondent reengaged the

services of the petitioner pursuant to the order of the Learned Administrative Tribunal dated

5.10.2001 and was disengaged on 25.12.2001 pursuant to notice dated 23.11.2001 annexure R-2.

The petitioner was engaged for construction work and after completion of work, his services were

terminated. The respondent was exempted from application of provisions of Industrial Employment

(Standing Orders Act). The respondents strictly followed the policy of last come first go.

3.

On the pleadings of the parties,following issues were framed:-

1.

Whether the termination of services of Shri Gurcharan Singh petitioner by the senior

Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, HPSEB Nalagarh, District Solan w.e.f.

25.12.2001 without complying with the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is

improper and unjustified as alleged?

OPP.

2.

If issue no.1 is proved, to what relief of service benefits and amount of compensation,

the petitioner is entitled to? OPP.

3.

Relief.

4.

The reference was decided by this Tribunal vide order dated 7.7.2010 which order has

been set aside in a writ petition by the Hon’ble High Court and the case has been remanded back to

this Tribunal to decide the question whether the respondent has complied with the provisions of

section 25-F or not. Therefore, the matter is being decided afresh.

5.

For the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, my findings on the aforesaid issues are as

under:

Issue No.1

Yes.

Issue No.2

Entitled for reinstatement with seniority and continuity in service but without

back wages.

Relief.

Reference answered in affirmative per operative part of award.

Reasons for findings

Issue No.1 :

6.

The Hon’ble High Court in the judgment dated 3.5.2001 has recorded a finding that

the applicant had completed more than 240 days in the preceding twelve calendar months from the

date of his termination. This finding came to be recorded on the basis of the order of the Learned

Administrative Tribunal dated 5.10.2011. This makes it crystal clear that the petitioner had

2490

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

completed 240 days of service in a calendar year prior to termination of his services. Therefore,

while terminating the services of the petitioner, the provisions of section 25-F would have

application.

7.

Admittedly, the respondent has not paid retrenchment compensation to the petitioner

as provided in clause (b) of section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The provisions of this

clause are mandatory as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case reported in (2008) 13 SCC 248

case titled as Rajasthan Lalit Kala Academy Vs. Radhey Shyam. The respondents have not

afforded clause (b) of section 25-F to the petitioner therefore, retrenchment is bad in the eyes of law

entitling him to relief.

8.

The petitioner had been in employment of the respondents since 1993. The

employment was continuous per order of the Learned Administrative Tribunal dated 5.10.2001

whereby he was not paid back wages. The termination of the petitioner was illegal therefore, the

petitioner is entitled to back wages as has been observed by the Hon’ble High Court in the order

dated 3.5.2011.

9.

The plea of abandonment of job by the petitioner is not established. There is no iota of

evidence on record which could go to show that the petitioner left the job on his own as no notice

or letter regarding the abandonment of the job by the petitioner is placed on record by the

respondent. In the absence of such record, inference cannot be drawn that the petitioner abandoned

the job. Reliance is placed on decision reported in AIR 1979 SC 582 case titled as G.T Lad and

others Vs. Chemicals and Fibers India Ltd. where it was held that:

“From the connotations reproduced above it clearly follows that to constitute

abandonment, there must be total or complete giving up of duties so as to indicate an

intention not to resume the same. In Buckingham Co. v. Venkatiah (1964) 4 SC R 265:

(AIR 1964 SC 1272), it was observed by this Court that under common law an

inference that an employee has abandoned or relinquished service is not easily drawn

unless from the length of absence and from other surrounding circumstances an

inference to that effect can be legitimately drawn and it can be assumed that the

employee intended to abandon service. Abandonment or relinquishment of service is

always a question of intention, and normally, such an intention cannot be attributed to

an employee without adequate evidence in that behalf. Thus whether there has been a

voluntary abandonment of service or not is a question of fact which has to be

determined in the light of the surrounding circumstances of each case.”

10. The respondent has also not followed the principle of last come first go. S/Shri Dila

Ram, Ved Prakash and Bhagat Ram who were junior to the petitioner are still working with the

respondent. S/Shri Dila Ram, Ved Prakash and Bhagat Ram per Ex. RPA were engaged on

26.12.1986, 27.11.1989 and 21.1.1990 that is after the engagement of the petitioner. There is

violation of the provisions of section 25-G and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which

also entitles the petitioner to relief. Reliances may also be placed on decision reported in 2007 LLR

72 SC in case titled as State of Haryana Vs. Dilbag Singh and 2011 LLR 107 (P and H) in case

titled as Deepak Kumar Gaur Vs. State of Haryana.

11. Thus, it is evident that the petitioner had completed continuous service of 240 days in

a calendar year and his juniors S/Shri Dila Ram, Ved Prakash and Bhagat Ram are still working

with the respondent. The termination of the services of the petitioner by the respondent in such

circumstances is violation of the provisions of section 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Industrial

Disputes Act. This issue is answered in favour of the petitioner.

2491

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

Issue No. 2 :

12. The termination of services of the petitioner by the respondent is illegal and

unjustified and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement in service alongwith seniority and

continuity. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages as he has not placed any material on record

to substantiate that he was not gainfully employed. This issue is partly answered in favour of the

petitioner.

Relief

In the result, the reference is answered in affirmative. Consequently, petitioner is held

entitled for reinstatement in service with seniority and continuity with effect from the date of his

termination but without back wages. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government

for publication in official gazette. File, after completion, be consigned to records.

Announced in the open court today on this 30th day of June, 2011 in the presence of parties

counsel.

D. K. SHARMA,

Presiding Judge,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla.

__________

IN THE COURT OF D.K SHARMA, PRESIDING JUDGE, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT, SHIMLA, (H.P).

Ref No. 27 of 2007.

Instituted on. 19.3.2007.

Decided on 31.5.2011.

Udho Ram S/o Shri Govind Ram R/o Dhobighat Dawerry Line, Kanhyal Niwas, Lower

Phagli, Shimla-4. ..Petitioner.

Vs.

The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Shimla, H. P. .. Respondent.

Reference under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

For petitioner :- Shri T. C. Sharma, Advocate.

For respondent :- Shri Himender Chandel, Advocate.

AWARD

The following reference has been received from appropriate government for adjudication:

“Whether the termination of services of Shri Udho Ram S/o Shri Govind Ram workman

by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Shimla H.P w.e.f. 19.11.1999 without

complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is proper and justified? If

not, what relief of service benefits the above aggrieved workman is entitled to?”

2492

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

1.

It is averred that the petitioner was engaged as a beldar by the respondent on 4.1.1999.

The petitioner has completed 240 days in a calendar year for the application of section 25N of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. However, the services of the petitioner were dispensed with without

complying the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. It is also alleged that while dispensing with

the services of the petitioner, the principle of last come first go was also not followed.

2.

The claim is opposed by the respondent on legal objections regarding cause of action

and maintainability. On merits, it is stated that the petitioner has worked upto 17.11.1999 on daily

wages. The petitioner abandoned the job on his own. The dispute was not covered under the

provisions of Industrial Disputes Act.

3.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:-

1.

Whether the termination of services of Shri Udho Ram petitioner by the Commissioner, M.C.

Shimla w.e.f. 19-11-1999 without complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is improper

and unjustified as alleged? OPP.

2.

If issue no.1 is proved, to what relief of service benefits the petitioner is entitled to?

OPP.

3.

Whether the claim is not maintainable in the present form? OPR.

4.

Relief.

4.

For the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, my findings on the aforesaid issues are as

under:

Issue No. 1

Yes.

Issue No. 2 Entitled for reinstatement with seniority and continuity in service but without

back wages.

Issue No.3

No.

Relief. Reference answered in affirmative per operative part of award.

Reasons for findings

Issue No.1 :

5.

It is made out from the statements of petitioner Udho Ram (PW-2), Neter Singh (PW-

1) and (PW-3) Nikram Singh Thakur, posted as Junior Engineer, M.C Shimla, who also appeared

as RW-1, that the petitioner had completed 240 days of service during the relevant period that is

between 4.1.1999 to 17.11.1999 when according to him, the services were terminated. Thus, he was

entitled for the protection of section 25N of the Act. However, since he was not served with three

month’s notice, the retrenchment is bad in the eyes of law entitling him to relief.

6.

The plea of abandonment of job by the petitioner is not established. There is no iota of

evidence on record which could go to show that the petitioner left the job on his own as no notice

or letter regarding the abandonment of the job by the petitioner is placed on record by the

respondent. In the absence of such record, inference cannot be drawn that the petitioner abandoned

the job. Reliance is placed on decision reported in AIR 1979 SC 582 case titled as G.T Lad and

others Vs. Chemicals and Fibers India Ltd. where it was held that:

2493

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

“From the connotations reproduced above it clearly follows that to constitute

abandonment, there must be total or complete giving up of duties so as to indicate an

intention not to resume the same. In Buckingham Co. v. Venkatiah (1964) 4 SC R 265:

(AIR 1964 SC 1272), it was observed by this Court that under common law an

inference that an employee has abandoned or relinquished service is not easily drawn

unless from the length of absence and from other surrounding circumstances an

inference to that effect can be legitimately drawn and it can be assumed that the

employee intended to abandon service. Abandonment or relinquishment of service is

always a question of intention, and normally, such an intention cannot be attributed to

an employee without adequate evidence in that behalf. Thus whether there has been a

voluntary abandonment of service or not is a question of fact which has to be

determined in the light of the surrounding circumstances of each case.”

7.

The respondent has also not followed the principle of last come first go. Shri Ramesh

Kumar who was junior to the petitioner is still working with the respondent. It is also admitted by

Shri Nikram Singh Thakur (PW-3) that as per Ex. PW-3/A Shri Ramesh Kumar engaged on

21.1.1999 that is after the engagement of the petitioner was still working with the respondent.

There is violation of the provisions of section 25G and H of the Industrial disputes Act, 1947 which

also entitles the petitioner to relief. Reliance may also be placed on decision reported in 2007 LLR

72 SC in case titled as State of Haryana Vs. Dilbag Singh and 2011 LLR 107 (P and H) in case

titled as Deepak Kumar Gaur Vs. State of Haryana.

8.

Thus, it is evident that the petitioner had completed continuous service of 240 days in

a calendar year and his junior Shri Ramesh Kumar is still working with the respondent. The

termination of the services of the petitioner by the respondent in such circumstances is violation of

the provisions of section 25-N, 25-G and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act. This issue is

answered in favour of the petitioner.

Issue No. 2:

9.

The termination of services of the petitioner by the respondent is illegal and

unjustified and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement in service alongwith seniority and

continuity. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages as he has not placed any material on record

to substantiate that he was not gainfully employed. This issue is partly answered in favour of the

petitioner.

Issue No. 3 :

10. The petitioner as held on findings on issue no.1 is entitled to reinstatement. The claim

filed by him as such is maintainable. This issue is answered in favour of the petitioner.

Relief :

In the result, the reference is answered in affirmative. Consequently, petitioner is held

entitled for reinstatement in service with seniority and continuity with effect from the date of his

termination but without back wages. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government

for publication in official gazette. File, after completion, be consigned to records.

Announced in the open court today on this 31st day of May, 2011 in the presence of parties

counsel.

D. K. SHARMA,

Presiding Judge,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla.

2494

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

IN THE COURT OF D.K SHARMA, PRESIDING JUDGE, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-

LABOUR COURT, SHIMLA, (H. P).

Ref No. 55 of 2007.

Instituted on. 27.6.2007.

Decided on 30.6.2011.

Lekh Ram S/o Shri Shiv Ram R/o Village Neri, P.O Kuthar (Krishangarh), Tehsil Kasauli,

District Solan, H.P. . . Petitioner.

Vs.

The Executive Engineer, I & PH Division, Arki, District Solan, H. P. . .Respondent.

Reference under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

For petitioner :- Shri Virender Thakur, Advocate.

For respondent :- Shri Jagdish Kanwar, Dy. DA.

AWARD

The following reference has been received from appropriate government for adjudication:

“Whether the termination of services of Shri Lekh Ram S/o Shri Shiv Ram workman by

the Executive Engineer, I & PH Division, Arki, District Solan, H.P. w.e.f. 01.07.1998

without complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as alleged by the

workman is proper and justified? If not, what relief of service benefits and amount of

compensation, the above aggrieved workman is entitled to?”

1.

It is averred that the petitioner was engaged as daily waged beldar in the year, 1994 in

Sub Division Sabathu with the respondent. The petitioner has completed 240 days in a calendar

year for the application of section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to

an Act). However, the services of the petitioner were dispensed with without complying the

provisions of Act. It is also alleged that while dispensing with the services of the petitioner “the

principle of last come first go” was also not followed. While making fresh recruitments, the

petitioner was not called to resume duties while making fresh recruitments.

2.

The claim is opposed by the respondent on legal objections regarding maintainability

and limitation. On merits, it is stated that the petitioner was engaged as daily waged beldar on 89

days basis on 21.9.1995 and worked as such as per mandays chart filed with the reply as annexure

A. It is further alleged that the petitioner was irregular worker and usually remained absent. The

petitioner left/abandoned the job on his own after 28.6.1998 and never contacted the respondent for

engagement nor gave any representation. The petitioner never worked for 240 days in any calendar

year. S/Shri Geeta Ram and Kripa Ram were engaged in the department on 1.4.1997 and

1.12.1997due to urgency of work. Shri Bir Singh was engaged on 1.4.1995. The above mentioned

workers remained continue in service. The petitioner was deputed on work alongwith Hari Prakash

and Dhyan Singh for the period 1.6.1998 to 30.6.1998. S/Shri Hari Prakash and Dhyan Singh also

deputed on work for the period 1.7.1998 to 31.7.1998 alongwith Shri Gopal Krishan who was also

irregular and was senior to the petitioner. The work was available for the period 1.7.1998 to

31.7.1998 to the petitioner but he did not join.

3.

On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:-

2495

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

1. Whether the services of the petitioner were terminated illegally as alleged? OPP.

2. If issue no.1 is proved in affirmative, to what service benefits and amount of

compensation, the petitioner is entitled to? OPP.

3. Whether this petition is bad for delay and latches? OPR.

4. Relief.

4.

For the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, my findings on the aforesaid issues are as

under:

Issue No.1

Yes.

Issue No.2

Entitled for reinstatement with seniority and continuity in service but without

back wages.

Issue No.3

No.

Relief. Reference answered in affirmative per operative part of award.

Reasons for findings

Issue No. 1 :

5.

It is apparent from the testimony of the petitioner that in fact he was engaged on

21.9.1995 and not in the year 1994. He was retrenched on 28.6.1998. He had completed only 80

days, 187 days, 168 days and 95 days in the years, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998 as per mandays chart

Ex. RW-1/A. The petitioner had not completed 240 days of service in a calendar year to seek the

protection of section 25-f of the Act. The respondent has not followed the principle of last come

first go. S/Shri Geeta Ram and Kripa Ram who were junior to the petitioner are still working with

the respondent. Shri Ramesh Kumar, Assistant Engineer, I and PH Sub Division Sabathu has

testified that S/Shri Geeta Ram and Kripa Ram were engaged on 1.4.1997 and 1.12.1997 per

mandays chart Ex. RW-1/B, that is, after the engagement of the petitioner., There is violation of

provisions of sections 25-G and 25-H of the Act which also entitles the petitioner to relief. Reliance

may also be placed on decision reported in 2007 LLR 72 SC in case titled as State of Haryana

Vs. Dilbag Singh and 2011 LLR 107 (Pand H) in case titled as Deepak Kumar Gaur Vs. State

of Haryana.

6.

The plea of abandonment of job by the petitioner is not established. The testimony of

RW-1 Shri Ramesh Kumar that muster roll no. 114 for the period 1.7.1998 to 31.7.1998 about

engagement of three workers was issued by the department and only S/Shri Hari Prakash and

Dhyan Singh turned up for job and the petitioner did not turn up is not fortified by any notice or

letter regarding the abandonment of job by the petitioner. In the absence of such record, inference

cannot be drawn that the petitioner abandoned the job. Reliance is placed on decision reported in

AIR 1979 SC 582 case titled as G.T Lad and others Vs. Chemicals and Fibers India Ltd.

where it was held that:

“From the connotations reproduced above it clearly follows that to constitute

abandonment, there must be total or complete giving up of duties so as to indicate an

intention not to resume the same. In Buckingham Co. v. Venkatiah (1964) 4 SC R 265:

(AIR 1964 SC 1272), it was observed by this Court that under common law an

inference that an employee has abandoned or relinquished service is not easily drawn

unless from the length of absence and from other surrounding circumstances an

2496

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

inference to that effect can be legitimately drawn and it can be assumed that the

employee intended to abandon service. Abandonment or relinquishment of service is

always a question of intention, and normally, such an intention cannot be attributed to

an employee without adequate evidence in that behalf. Thus whether there has been a

voluntary abandonment of service or not is a question of fact which has to be

determined in the light of the surrounding circumstances of each case.”

8.

Thus, it is evident that juniors to petitioner S/Shri Kripa Ram and Geeta Ram are still

working with the respondent and as such the termination of the services of the petitioner by the

respondent in such circumstances is violation of the provisions of sections 25-G and 25-H of the

Industrial Disputes Act. This issue is answered in favour of the petitioner.

Issue No. 2 :

9.

The termination of services of the petitioner by the respondent is illegal and

unjustified and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement in service alongwith seniority and

continuity. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages as he has not placed any material on record

to substantiate that he was not gainfully employed. This issue is partly answered in favour of the

petitioner.

Issue No. 3 :

10. The petitioner as held on findings on issue no.1 is entitled to reinstatement. This issue

is answered in favour of the petitioner.

Relief :

In the result, the reference is answered in affirmative. Consequently, petitioner is held

entitled for reinstatement in service with seniority and continuity with effect from the date of his

termination but without back wages. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government

for publication in official gazette. File, after completion, be consigned to records.

Announced in the open court today on this 30th day of June, 2011 in the presence of parties

counsel.

D.K SHARMA,

Presiding Judge,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla.

__________

IN THE COURT OF D.K SHARMA, PRESIDING JUDGE, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUML-

ABOUR COURT, SHIMLA, (H.P).

Ref No. 58 of 2009

Instituted on. 17.8.2009 .

Decided on. 30.6.2011.

Mohinder Singh S/o Shri Narainu, through his counsel Shri R.D Kaundal, Advocate H.P

High court, Shimla-1, Ashirbad Cottage, Sanjauli, Shimla-6. . . Petitioner.

Vs.

M/s S.R Forging Ltd. Jharmajari, Barotiwala Tehsil Nalagarh District Solan, H.P. . .Respondent.

2497

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

Reference under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

For petitioner :- Shri R.D Kaundal, Advocate.

For respondents :- Already exparte.

AWARD

The following reference has been received from appropriate government for adjudication:

“Whether contention of Shri Mohinder Singh, workman through his counsel Shri R.D

Kaundal, Advocate, H.P High Court, Shimla-1, Ashirbad Cottage, Sanjauli Shimla-6

before the Management of S.R Forging Ltd. Jharmajari, Barotiwala Tehsil Nalagarh

District Solan for the payment of interest @18% for delaying implementation of recovery

certificate issued on 6.9.2001 for 4 years and 4 months in respect of award dated

15.12.1997 of Hon’ble Labour Court, Shimla is proper and justified? If yes, what relief

the aggrieved workman is entitled to from above management ?”

1.

It is averred that the petitioner had served as daily waged Chowkidar under M/s S.R

Forging Ltd. Jharmajari, Barotiwala Tehsil Nalagarh District Solan, H.P during the period

15.10.1985 to 23.1.1992. The petitioner rendered 240 days of service in each calendar year before

his retrenchment in violation of the provisions of Industrial disputes Act. The reference was made

to this court on dispute being raised by the petitioner was answered in his favour per award dated

15.12.1997. The petitioner was issued recovery certificate to the tune of Rs. 95,629/- on account of

back wages vide letter dated 6.9.2001 by Labour commissioner, Shimla. The respondent no.1

delayed the implementation of recovery certificate for four years and four months. The petitioner

filed an application under section 33-C of Industrial Dispute for grant of interest @ 18%. On

direction by this court, the petitioner approached the Labour Commissioner for issuance of

recovery certificate. The Labour Commissioner has made said reference to this Court.

2. On appraisal letter dated 6.9.2001 addressed by Labour Commissioner, Shimla to

Collector Solan, it is apparent that a sum of Rs. 95,629/- found outstanding against the petitioner on

account of back wages awarded per award passed by this Court.

3.

It was incumbent upon the Collector to have initiated proceedings for recovery against

respondent no.1 and ensure payment. However, there was inordinate delay in execution of the

order. The circumstances, under which the delay has been caused has not been explained. The

petitioner has not been able to spell out as to how the respondent no.1 was at fault in

implementation of the award. Claim of the petitioner for grant of interest @ 18% for the

intervening period of four years and four months is not tenable. The petitioner has also filed CWP

No. 248 of 2004 before the Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble High Court disposed of the petition

on 2.5.2005 as follows:-

“Pursuant to the award passed by the Labour Court on 15th December,

1997,apparently respondent no.2 issued a certificate on 16th July, 2001 in terms of

section 33-C(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The copy of certificate apparently

does appear to have been marked to respondent no.3, but the petitioner’s grievance in

this petition is that respondent no.3 has not taken any steps in the direction of

executing the award passed by the Labour Court on 15th December, 1997 despite the

aforesaid certificate issued on 16th July, 2001. We do not know the circumstances

under which respondent no.3 may or may not have executed the award but the facts

which are spelt out in the case do indicate that even the petitioner did not taken any

steps in approaching respondent no.3 with a request for execution of the award.

2498

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

Without doing that, the petitioner has rushed to this Court which we not appreciate or

approve.

Rased on the aforesaid observations, we dispose of the petition with liberty to the

petitioner to approach respondent no.3 with a request to execute the award in terms of

the provisions contained in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. If the petitioner does so

within one month from today, we direct respondent no.3 to do the needful and take all

steps in the direction of execution of the award as expeditiously as possible and

without any delay whatsoever.”

4.

The aforesaid order also makes it clear that the petitioner had attributed failure to

implement award to the Collector, Solan who was respondent no.3 in the petition and not to the

respondent no.1 M/s S.R Forging Ltd. Jharmajari, Barotiwala Tehsil Nalagarh District Solan, H.P.

The recovery was to be effected by Collector, Solan from respondent no.1 and the delay, if any, has

been caused on behalf of the Collector, Solan and not respondent no.1, so, no industrial dispute

exists between the petitioner and respondent no.1 in this context. The dispute in this case is not in

the nature of Industrial Dispute. Section 2-A (i) of the Industrial Disputes defines as follows:-

“In relation to any industrial dispute concerning 1[* * *] any industry carried on by or under

the authority of the Central Government, 2[* * *] or by a railway company 3[or concerning any

such controlled industry as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government] 4[* * *] or

in relation to an industrial dispute concerning 5[ 6[7[ 8[a Dock Labour Board established under

section 5A of the Dock Workers (Regulation of employment) Act; 1948 (9 of 1948), or 9[the

Industrial Finance Corporation of India Limited formed and registered under the Companies Act,

1956 (1 of 1956)] or the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation established under section 3 of the

Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (34of 1948), or the Board of Trustees constituted under

section 3A of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1948 (46 of

1948), or the Central Board of Trustees and the State Boards of Trustees constituted under section

5A and section 5B, respectively, of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions

Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), 10[* * *], or the Life Insurance Corporation of India established under

section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956), or 9[the Oil and Natural Gas

Corporation Limited registered under tile Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956)], or the Deposit

insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation established under section 3 of the Deposit Insurance

and Credit Guarantee Corporation Act, 1961 (47 of 1961), or the Central Warehousing Corporation

established under section 3 of tile Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962 (58 of 1962), or the Unit

Trust of India established under section 3 of the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963 (52 of 1963), or the

Food Corporation of India established under section 3, or a Board of Management established for

two or more contiguous States under section 16 of the Food Corporations Act, 1964 (37 of 1964),

or 9[the Airports Authority of India constituted under section 3 of the Airports Authority of India

Act, 1994 (55 of 1994)], or a Regional Rural Bank established under section 3 of the Regional

Rural Banks Act, 1976 (21 of 1976),or the Export Credit and Guarantee Corporation Limited or the

Industrial Reconstruction Bank of India Limited ], 11[ the National Housing Bank established

under section 3 of the National Housing Bank Act, 1987 (53 of 1987)], or 12[ 9[an air transport

service, or a banking or an insurance company], a mine, an oil-field,] 13[a Cantonment Board,] or a

major port, The central Government.

The aforesaid provision makes it clear that dispute or difference between workman and

employer connected with, or arising out of, such discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination

shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute. The dispute which was referred earlier and had already

been decided was industrial dispute. The dispute in this case has also not been raised by the

workman and is figment of imagination of Shri R.D Kaundal, Advocate.

2499

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

On the aforesaid score, the petitioner has not been established that there is any industrial

dispute and the award was not intentionally impleaded due to failure of respondent no.1 (M/s S.R

Forging Ltd) The petitioner is not entitled to recover interest to the tune of Rs. 68,000/- including

litigation cost of Rs. 8,000/- from respondent no.1.

Relief.

In the result, the reference is answered in negative. Consequently, petitioner is not held

entitled to recover interest to the tune of Rs. 68,000/- including litigation cost of Rs. 8,000/- from

respondent no.1. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government for publication in

official gazette. File, after completion, be consigned to records.

Announced in the open court today on this 30th day of June, 2011 in the presence of parties

counsel.

D. K SHARMA,

Presiding Judge,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla.

___________

Ref.105/2009

Sh Rajesh Kumar V/s Pyaranid Electronics Parwanoo.

3.6.2011

Present:- Sh Niranjan Verma ,Advocate for petitioner.

Sh Satish Kumar ,AR for the respondent.

Heard. The parties have arrived at lawful compromise. The respondent has made payment

of compensation of Rs.3,701/- after adjusting amount of advance to the petitioner by way of cheque

no.813032. The cheque has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner by the Authorized

Representative of the respondent today before this Court. The dispute between the parties as such

stands settled in terms of settlement and the reference is answered accordingly. Let a copy of this

award be sent to the appropriate government for publication in the official gazette. File , after

completion , be consigned to records.

Announced.

3.6.2011.

Sd/-

Presiding Judge,

Labour Court, Shimla.

________

yks

yks

yks

yksd fuekZ.k foHkkx

fuekZ.k foHkkx

fuekZ.k foHkkx

fuekZ.k foHkkx

“kqf) i=

f”keyk&2] 25 vxLr] 2011

la0 ih0ch0MCY;w0 ¼ch0½,Q¼5½ 97@2009

la0 ih0ch0MCY;w0 ¼ch0½,Q¼5½ 97@2009

la0 ih0ch0MCY;w0 ¼ch0½,Q¼5½ 97@2009

la0 ih0ch0MCY;w0 ¼ch0½,Q¼5½ 97@2009-&bl foHkkx }kjk fnukad 24&06&2011 dks tkjh

Hkw&vtZu vf/kfu;e 1894 dh /kkjk 6 o 7 ds vUrZxr lela[;d vf/klwpuk ¼xkao “kkerh] rglhy o ftyk

lksyu½ esa [kljk u0 140@106@1 dk jdok ^^^^^^^^0&12 ch?kk******** ds LFkku ij [kljk u0 140@106@1 dk

jdok ^^^^^^^^0&2 ch?kk******** i<+k tk, A

vkns”k )kjk]

gLrk{kfjr@&

iz/kku lfpo ¼yksd fuekZ.k½A

2500

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

vf/klwpuk

f'keyk&4] 25 vxLr] 2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&39@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&39@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&39@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&39@2011-&fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk dh izfØ;k ,oa

dk;Z lapkyu fu;ekoyh] 1973 ds fu;e 140 ds vUrxZr fgekpy izns'k vxzØ; ¼fujlu½ fo/ks;d] 2011

¼2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 18½ tks vkt fnukad 25 vxLr] 2011 dks fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk esa

iqj%LFkkfir gks pqdk gS] loZlk/kkj.k dh lwpukFkZ jkti= esa eqfnzr djus gsrq izsf"kr fd;k tkrk gSA

vkns'k }kjk]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

lfpo]

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkkA

&&&&&&

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 18

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 18

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 18

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 18

fgekpy izns'k vxzØ; ¼fujlu½ fo/ks;d] 2011

fgekpy izns'k vxzØ; ¼fujlu½ fo/ks;d] 2011

fgekpy izns'k vxzØ; ¼fujlu½ fo/ks;d] 2011

fgekpy izns'k vxzØ; ¼fujlu½ fo/ks;d] 2011

¼fo/kku lHkk esa iqj%LFkkfir :i esa½

fgekpy izns”k vxzØ; vf/kfu;e] 2010 ¼2011 dk vf/kfu;e la[;kad 10½ dk fujlu djus ds

fy, fo/ks;d

fo/ks;d

fo/ks;d

fo/ks;d A

Hkkjr x.kjkT; ds cklBosa o’kZ esa fgekpy izns”k fo/kku lHkk }kjk fuEufyf[kr :Ik esa ;g vf/kfu;fer gks%&

1- laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke-&bl vf/kfu;e dk laf{kIr uke fgekpy izns”k vxzØ; ¼fujlu½ vfèkfu;e]

2011 gSA

2- fujlu vkSj O;ko`fÙk;ka

fujlu vkSj O;ko`fÙk;ka

fujlu vkSj O;ko`fÙk;ka

fujlu vkSj O;ko`fÙk;ka-&¼1½ fgekpy izns”k vxzØ; vf/kfu;e] 2010 ¼2011 dk 10½ dk

,rn}kjk fujlu fd;k tkrk gS%

ijUrq ,slk fujlu&

¼d½ bl izdkj fujflr vf/kfu;e ds v/khu dh xbZ fdlh ckr ;k dh xbZ fdlh dkjZokbZ(

¼[k½ bl izdkj fujflr vf/kfu;e ds v/khu ikfjr fdlh fMØh vkSj tks vafre gks xbZ gks(

2501

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

¼x½ bl izdkj fujflr vf/kfu;e ds v/khu fd, x, fu{ksi ds izfrnk; gsrq fdlh nkos ;k nh xbZ

fdlh izfrHkwfr( ;k

¼?k½ bl izdkj fujflr vf/kfu;e ds v/khu ykxr ds fuoZgu esa mixr fdlh O;; dks] izHkkfor

ugha djsxkA

¼2½ ,sls fujlu ds gksrs gq, Hkh bl izdkj fujflr vf/kfu;e ds vèkhu] fu’iknu dk;Zokfg;ksa

lfgr leLr nkos] vihysa vkSj vU; dk;Zokfg;ka] tks fdlh U;k;ky; ;k vihyh; ;k iqujh{k.k izkf/kdkjh ds

le{k yafcr gSa] bl izdkj fujflr vf/kfu;e ds micU/kksa ds vuqlkj fuiVkbZ tk,axh] ekuks ;g vfèkfu;e

fujflr u fd;k x;k gksA

&&&&&&&

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kksa dk dFku

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kksa dk dFku

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kksa dk dFku

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kksa dk dFku

fgekpy izns”k vxzØ; vf/kfu;e] 2010 ¼2011dk vf/kfu;e la[;kad 10½ dks fgekpy izns”k jkT;

esa lg&va'k/kkfj;ksa vkSj fdjk,nkjksa dks vxzØ; ds vf/kdkj dk micU/k djus ds mn~ns”; ls vfèkfu;fer

fd;k x;k FkkA

mi jftLVªkj dh “kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djus okys jktLo vf/kdkfj;ksa us fofHkUu cSBdksa esa ;g voxr

djok;k gS fd tulk/kkj.k dks mijksDr vf/kfu;fefr ds dkj.k fo”ks’kdj mu ekeyksa esa tgka cgqr ls

lg&va”k/kkjh gSa dfBukbZ vk jgh gS vkSj mu esa ls ,d ;k dqN izfrdwy ifjfLFkfr;ksa }kjk viuh Hkwfe dk

foØ; djus ds fy, ok/; gksrs gSaA jktLo vf/kdkfj;ksa us ;g Hkh voxr djok;k gS fd ;g vf/kfu;e u

dsoy blesa fufgr dh izkfIr esa vlQy gqvk gS] vfirq tulk/kkj.k ds fy, leL;k,a mRiUu dj nh gSA

bl vf/kfu;e us] jkT; ds fdlkuksa esa cgqfo/k eqdnesackth dh vfèklaHkO;rk dks c<+k fn;k gSA blfy,]

mi;qZDr vf/kfu;e dks fujflr djus dk fofu”p; fd;k x;k gSA

;g fo/ks;d mi;qZDr mnns”;ksa dh iwfrZ ds fy, gSA

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

izHkkjh eU=hA

f”keyk%

rkjh[k% ------------ 2011

&&&&&&

foRrh; Kkiu

foRrh; Kkiu

foRrh; Kkiu

foRrh; Kkiu

&&&”kwU;&&

&&&&&&&&

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

&&”kwU;&&

2502

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

AUTHORITATIVE ENGLISH TEXT

Bill No. 18 of 2011.

THE HIMACHAL PRADESH PRE-EMPTION (REPEAL) BILL, 2011

(AS INTRODUCED IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY)

A

BILL

to repeal the Himachal Pradesh Pre-emption Act, 2010 (Act No.10 of 2011).

BE it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of Himachal Pradesh in the Sixty-second Year of the Republic of

India as follows:—

1.

Short title.—This Act may be called the Himachal Pradesh Pre-emption (Repeal) Act,

2011.

2.

Repeal and Savings.—(1) The Himachal Pradesh Pre-emption Act, 2010 (10 of 2011)

is hereby repealed:

Provided that such repeal shall not affect—

(a) anything done or any action taken under the Act so repealed;

(b) any decree which has been passed under the Act so repealed and has become final;

(c) any claim for the refund of the deposit made or a security furnished under the Act so

repealed; or

(d) any expenditure incurred in the discharge of cost under the Act so repealed.

(2) Notwithstanding such repeal, all suits, appeals and other proceedings, including

execution proceedings under the Act so repealed, pending before any court or appellate or

revisional authority, shall be disposed off in accordance with the provisions of the Act so repealed,

as if the Act has not been repealed.

_________

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

The Himachal Pradesh Pre-emption Act, 2010 (Act No. 10 of 2011) was enacted with the

objective to provide for right of pre-emption to the co-sharers and tenants in the State of Himachal

Pradesh. In various meetings, the Revenue Officers exercising the powers of Sub-Registrars have

apprised that the general public is facing hardships due to aforesaid enactment more particularly in

those cases where there are numerous co-sharers and one or some of them are compelled by

adverse circumstances to sell their land. The Revenue Officers have also apprised that this Act has

failed to achieve the objective behind it, but has rather caused problems to general public. This Act

has increased the probability of manifold litigations amongst farmers of the State. Thus, it has been

decided to repeal the Act ibid.

2503

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

This Bill seeks to achieve the aforesaid objectives.

(THAKUR GULAB SINGH)

Minister-in-Charge.

SHIMLA:

The …………., 2011.

_________

FINANCIAL MEMORANDUM

—NIL—

————

MEMORANDUM REGARDING DELEGATED LEGISLATION

—NIL—

&&&&&&&

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

vf/klwpuk

f'keyk&4] 25 vxLr] 2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&41@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&41@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&41@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&41@2011-&fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk dh izfØ;k ,oa

dk;Z lapkyu fu;ekoyh] 1973 ds fu;e 140 ds vUrxZr fgekpy izns'k Hkw&jktLo ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d]

2011 ¼2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 20½ tks vkt fnukad 25 vxLr] 2011 dks fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk esa

iqj%LFkkfir gks pqdk gS] loZlk/kkj.k dh lwpukFkZ jkti= esa eqfnzr djus gsrq izsf"kr fd;k tkrk gSA

vkns'k }kjk]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

lfpo]

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkkA

2504

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 20

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 20

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 20

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 20

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&jktLo ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 201

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&jktLo ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 201

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&jktLo ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 201

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&jktLo ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 2011

¼fo/kku lHkk esa iqj%LFkkfir :Ik esa½

fgekpy izns”k Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ¼1954 dk vf/kfu;e la[;kad 6½ dk vkSj la”kksèku djus

ds fy, fo/ks;dA

fo/ks;dA

fo/ks;dA

fo/ks;dA

Hkkjr x.kjkT; ds cklBosa o’kZ esa fgekpy izns”k fo/kku lHkk }kjk fuEufyf[kr :Ik esa ;g vf/kfu;fer gks%&

1-

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke-&bl vf/kfu;e dk laf{kIr uke fgekpy izns”k Hkw&jktLo ¼la”kksèku½ vf/kfu;e]

2011 gSA

2-

/kkjk 34 dk la'kks/ku

/kkjk 34 dk la'kks/ku

/kkjk 34 dk la'kks/ku

/kkjk 34 dk la'kks/ku-&fgekpy izns”k Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ¼ftls blesa blds Ik”pkr~

^^ewy vf/kfu;e^^ dgk x;k gS½ dh /kkjk 34 esa]&

¼d½ mi/kkjk ¼1½ esa] ^^izR;sd lEink ds iVokjh ls^^ “kCnksa ds LFkku ij ^^izR;sd lEink ds

lEc) jktLo vf/kdkjh ls^^ “kCn j[ks tk,xsaA

¼[k½ mi/kkjk ¼3½ esa] ^^izR;sd lEink ds iVokjh^^ “kCnksa ds Ik”pkr~ ^^vkSj jktLo vf/kdkjh^^

“kCn vUr%LFkkfir fd, tk,xasA

3-

/kkjk

/kkjk

/kkjk

/kkjk 35 dk la'kks/ku

35 dk la'kks/ku

35 dk la'kks/ku

35 dk la'kks/ku-&Ekwy vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 35 eas]&

¼d½ mi/kkjk ¼1½ esa] ^^iVokjh^^ “kCn ds Ik”pkr~ ^^;k lEc) jktLo vf/kdkjh^^ “kCn

vUr%LFkkfir fd, tk,xsa(

¼[k½ mi/kkjk ¼2½ esa] ^^iVokjh^^ “kCn ds Ik”pkr~ ^^;k lEc) jktLo vf/kdkjh^^ “kCn

vUr%LFkkfir fd, tk,xsa(

¼x½ mi/kkjk ¼3½ esa] ^^iVokjh^^ “kCn ds LFkku ij ^^;FkkfLFkfr] iVokjh ;k jktLo vf/kdkjh^^

“kCn j[ks tk,xsa( vkSj

¼?k½ mi/kkjk ¼5½ esa] ^^iVokjh^^ “kCn ds Ik”pkr~ ^^;k jktLo vfèkdkjh^^ “kCn vUr%LFkkfir fd,

tk,xsa(

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kk

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kk

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kk

mn~ns';ksa vkSj dkj.kksa dk dFku

sa dk dFku

sa dk dFku

sa dk dFku

fgekpy izns”k Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 dh /kkjk 34] foÙkk;qDr }kjk cuk, x, fu;eksa ds vuqlkj

iVokjh }kjk vf/kdkj&vfHkys[k ds dkfyd v|ru ds fy, micU/k djrh gS vkSj bl ds iz;kstu ds fy,]

dyDVj izR;sd lEink ds iVokjh }kjk ukekarj.kksa dk jftLVj vkSj ,sls vU; jftLVj j[kok,xk tSls

foÙkk;qDr }kjk fu;ekas ds }kjk fofgr fd, tk,aA blds vfrfjDr iwoksZDr vfèkfu;e dh /kkjk 35] O;fDr

}kjk ukekarj.k jftLVj esa ukekarj.k izfo’V djokus vkSj jktLo vfèkdkjh }kjk mldk lR;kiu djokus ds

fy, fdlh lEink esa Hkw&Lokeh vkfn ds :Ik esa fdUgha vfèkdkjksa dks vftZr djus gsrq viukbZ tkus okyh

izfØ;k ds fy, micU/k djrh gSA vf/kdkj&vfHkys[k ds v|ru vkSj ukekarj.k ds lR;kiu dh izfØ;k dks

ljy djus gsrq ;g izLrkfor fd;k x;k gS fd vkosnd dks] fofufnZ’V jftLVªhÑr nLrkostksa ds vk/kkj ij]

ukekarj.k dks ;k rks rglhy dk;kZy; esa ;k iVokj o`Ùk] tSlk og pkgs] ij izfo’V djokus vkSj lR;kfir

2505

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

djokus gsrq ,d fodYi nsus dk micUèk fd;k tk,A ;g izR;k”kk dh tkrh gS fd tgka ,d rjQ ;g

ukekarj.k ekeyksa ds Rofjr fu’iknu dks lqfuf”pr djsxk vkSj nwljh rjQ vke turk dks izfoyacu ¼jkgr½

Hkh miyC/k djok,xkA blfy, mi;qZDr vf/kfu;e esa la”kks/ku djuk vko”;d gks x;k gSA

;g fo/ks;d mi;qZDr mn~ns”;ksa dh iwfrZ ds fy, gSA

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

¼Bkdqj xqykc flag½

izHkkjh eU=hA

f”keyk%

rkjh[k%----------------] 2011

&&&&&&&&

foRrh; Kkiu

foRrh; Kkiu

foRrh; Kkiu

foRrh; Kkiu

&&'kwU;&&

&&&&&&&&&

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

izR;k;ksftr fo/kku lEcU/kh Kkiu

&&”kwU;&&

_______

AUTHORITATIVE ENGLISH TEXT

Bill No. 20 of 2011

THE HIMACHAL PRADESH LAND REVENUE (AMENDMNT)

BILL, 2011

(AS INTRODUCED IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY)

A

BILL

further to amend the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1954 (Act No. 6 of 1954).

BE it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Himachal Pradesh in the Sixty-second Year of the

Republic of India as follows:—

1.

Short title.—This Act may be called the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue

(Amendment) Act, 2011.

2.

Amendment of section 34.—In section 34 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue

Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the principal Act’),-

(a) in sub-section (1), for the words “by the Patwari of each estate” the words “by the

Revenue Officer concerned for each estate” shall be substituted; and

2506

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

(b) in sub-section (3), after the words “each estate”, the words “and the Revenue

Officer” shall be inserted.

3.

Amendment of section 35.—In section 35 of the principal Act,-

(a) in sub-section (1), after the words “of the estate”, the words “or the Revenue

Officer concerned” shall be inserted;

(b) in sub-section (2), after the words “to the patwari”, the words “or the Revenue

Officer concerned” shall be inserted;

(c) in sub-section (3), after the words “The patwari”, the words and signs “or the

Revenue Officer, as the case may be,” shall be inserted; and

(d) in sub-section (5), after the words “to the patwari”, the words “or the Revenue

Officer” shall be inserted.

__________

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

Section 34 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1954 provides for periodical up-

dation of record-of-rights by the Patwari in accordance with the rules made by the Financial

Commissioner and for this purpose, the Collector shall cause to be kept by the Patwari of each

estate a register of mutations and such other registers as the Financial Commissioner may prescribe

by rules. Further, section 35 of the Act ibid provides for the procedure to be followed by the person

acquiring any rights in an estate as a land owner etc. for getting the mutation entered in the

mutation register and attestation thereof by the Revenue Officer. In order to simplify the procedure

for up-dation of record-of-rights and attestation of mutation, it has been proposed to provide an

option to the applicant to get the mutation entered and attested either at the Tehsil office or at the

Patwar Circle as he may desire, on the basis of specified registered documents. It is expected that

on the one hand this will ensure speedy disposal of mutation cases and on the other hand, it will

also provide a reprieve to the general public. This has necessitated amendments in the Act ibid.

This Bill seeks to achieve the above objectives.

(THAKUR GULAB SINGH)

Minister-in-Charge.

SHIMLA:

The ,2011.

___________

FINANCIAL MEMORANDUM

—NIL—

MEMORANDUM REGARDING DELEGATED LEGISLATION

—NIL—

_________

2507

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk lfpoky;

vf/klwpuk

f'keyk&4] 25 vxLr] 2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&40@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&40@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&40@2011

la[;k % fo0 l0&fo0&ljdkjh fo/ks;d@1&40@2011-&fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkk dh izfØ;k ,oa

dk;Z lapkyu fu;ekoyh] 1973 ds fu;e 140 ds vUrxZr fgekpy izns'k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek ¼la'kks/ku½

fo/ks;d] 2011 ¼2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 19½ tks vkt fnukad 25 vxLr] 2011 dks fgekpy izns'k fo/kku

lHkk esa iqj%LFkkfir gks pqdk gS] loZlk/kkj.k dh lwpukFkZ jkti= esa eqfnzr djus gsrq izsf"kr fd;k tkrk gSA

vkns'k }kjk]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

xkso/kZu flag]

lfpo]

fgekpy izns'k fo/kku lHkkA

&&&&&&

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;ka

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;ka

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;ka

2011 dk fo/ks;d la[;kad 19

d 19

d 19

d 19

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 2011

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 2011

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 2011

fgekpy izns'k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek ¼la'kks/ku½ fo/ks;d] 2011

¼fo/kku lHkk esa iqj%LFkkfir :Ik esa½

fgekpy izns”k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek vf/kfu;e] 1972 ¼1973 dk vf/kfu;e la[;kad 19½ dk vkSj

la”kks/ku djus ds fy, fo/ks;dA

fo/ks;dA

fo/ks;dA

fo/ks;dA

Hkkjr x.kjkT; ds cklBosa o’kZ esa fgekpy izns”k fo/kku lHkk }kjk fuEufyf[kr :Ik esa ;g vf/kfu;fer gks%&

1- laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke

laf{kIr uke-&bl vf/kfu;e dk laf{kIr uke fgekpy izns”k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek ¼la”kks/ku½

vf/kfu;e] 2011 gSA

2- /kkjk 5 dk la'kks/ku

/kkjk 5 dk la'kks/ku

/kkjk 5 dk la'kks/ku

/kkjk 5 dk la'kks/ku-&fgekpy izns”k Hkw&tksr vf/kdre lhek vf/kfu;e] 1972 dh /kkjk 5 esa]

[k.M ¼t½ ds LFkku ij fuEufyf[kr [k.M j[kk tk,xk] vFkkZr~%&

^^¼t½ jkT; ljdkj }kjk ;Fkk vf/klwfpr Hkwfe tks]&

¼i½ vkS|ksfxd bdkbZ¼;ksa½ ;k tyfo|qr ifj;kstuk¼vksa½ ;k Ik;ZVu bdkbZ¼;ksa½ ;k lwpuk

izkS|ksfxdh LFky¼yksa½ ;k ckW;ks&rduhdh LFky¼yksa½ dks LFkkfir djus ds iz;kstu ds fy,

dEiuh vfèkfu;e] 1956 ds v/khu fuxfer fdlh dEiuh(

¼ii½ tkfrokn] enkR;; vkSj u”khyh nokvksa ds O;lu vkfn ds mUewyu lfgr uSfrd ;k

/keZ&fujis{k f”k{kkvksa dk izpkj djus okys /kkfeZd ;k v/;kfRed fudk;ksa ;k laxBuksa ;k

laioZrdksa( vkSj

2508

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

¼iii½ “kSf{kd vkSj [ksy izlqfo/kkvksa rFkk volajpuk dk l`tu djus vkSj vuqj{k.k ds fy,

fudk;ksa ;k laxBukasa(

}kjk mi;qZDr fofufnZ’V fdlh Hkh iz;kstu ds okLrfod mi;ksx ds fy,] /kkfjr gS ;k fdlh Hkh jhfr esa

/kkfjr dh tkuh gSA ;g fopkj djrs le; fd D;k ,slh Hkwfe bl izdkj /kkfjr gS ;k vftZr dh tkuh gS

jkT; ljdkj] iwoZ /kkfjr Hkwfe ftlds vUrXkZr iwoksZDr iz;kstuksa ds mi;ksx gsrq igys ls /kkfjr Hkwfe Hkh

gksxh] dh lhek vkSj vofLFkfr ;fn dksbZ gks] vkSj blds Hkfo’; ds foLrkj.k ds fy, mi;qDr vko”;drk

dk /;ku Hkh j[ksxh%

ijUrq ;fn jkT; ljdkj dk] bl [k.M ds v/khu vf/klwfpr Hkwfe dh n”kk esa] lek/kku gks tkrk gS

fd Hkwfe okLro esa vftZr ugha dh xbZ gS ;k ml iz;kstu ds fy, okLrfod mi;ksx esa ugha ykbZ xbZ gS

ftlds fy,] bl [k.M ds v/khu tkjh dh xbZ vf/klwpuk dh rkjh[k ls nks o’kZ dh vof/k ¼;k ik¡p o’kZ ls

vuf/kd ,slh foLrkfjr vof/k tSlh jkT; ljdkj fofuf”pr djs½ ds Hkhrj ;g Hkwfe vftZr ;k /kkfjr dh

tkuh izLrkfor Fkh] rks jkT; ljdkj ,slh tk¡p] tSlh ;g mfpr le>s] ds Ik”pkr~ fofgr jhfr esa izdkf”kr

vkns”k }kjk] funs”k ns ldsxh fd vkns”k esa fofufnZ’V Hkwfe ;k mldk dksbZ Hkkx] ,slh rkjh[k ls tSlh vkns”k

esa mfYyf[kr gS] NwV izkIr Hkwfe ugha jgsxhA^^A

________

AUTHORITATIVE ENGLISH TEXT

Bill No. 19 of 2011

THE HIMACHAL PRADESH CEILING ON LAND HOLDINGS

(AMENDMNT) BILL, 2011

(AS INTRODUCED IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY)

A

BILL

further to amend the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 (Act

No.19 of 1973).

BE it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of Himachal Pradesh in the

Sixty-second Year of the Republic of India as follows:—

1.

Short title.—This Act may be called the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings

(Amendment) Act, 2011.

2.

Amendment of section 5.—In section 5 of the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land

Holdings Act,1972, for clause (h), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:-

“(h) land as is notified by the State Government being land which is held or to be acquired

in any manner, by,-

(i) a Company incorporated under the Companies Act,1956 for the purpose of setting up

of industrial unit(s) or hydel project(s) or tourism unit(s) or information technology

park (s) or bio-technology park(s);

(ii) religious or spiritual bodies or organizations or promoters, propagating moral or

secular teachings including eradication of casteism, alco-holism and drug addiction

etc.; and

2509

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

(iii) bodies or organizations for creating and maintaining educational and sports facilities

and infrastructure;

for bonafide use for any of the above specified purposes. In considering whether such land is so

held or to be acquired, the State Government shall have regard to the extent and location of land, if

any, already held including any land which it may already hold for use for abovesaid purposes and

its genuine requirement for future expansion:

Provided that if the State Government, in the case of land notified under this clause, is

satisfied that the land has not been actually acquired or has not been actually put to use for the

purpose for which it was proposed to be acquired or hold, within a period of two years (or such

extended period not exceeding five years as the State Government may decide) from the date of

notification issued under this clause, the State Government may, after making such enquiry as it

thinks fit, by order published in the prescribed manner, direct that the land or any part thereof

specified in the order shall, with effect from such date as is mentioned in the order, cease to be

exempted land.".

________

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

The Government is inviting investors and entrepreneurs in industries, information

technology, bio-technology, tourism and hydel projects etc. in the interest of development of the

State but they cannot hold land more than the permissible area specified under section 4 of the

Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972, for the purpose of setting up of such

project. Further religious and spiritual bodies and organizations promoting moral and secular

teaching including eradication of casteism, alcoholism and drug addictions etc. and bodies and

organizations creating educational and sports facilities and infrastructure cannot hold land more

than permissible area specified under section 4 of the Act ibid. Thus, it has been considered

necessary to amend section 5 suitably and to provide exemption to these bodies etc. This has

necessitated amendments in the Act ibid.

This Bill seeks to achieve the aforesaid objectives.

(THAKUR GULAB SINGH )

Minister-in-Charge.

SHIMLA:

The , 2011.

__________

FINANCIAL MEMORANDUM

—NIL—

___________

MEMORANDUM REGARDING DELEGATED LEGISLATION

—NIL—

2510

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

c vnkyr Jh dqynhi ifV;ky] dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh Hkksjat] ftyk gehjiqj ¼fg0 iz0½

Jherh ehjka nsoh iRuh Jh gal jkt] oklh Vhdk ledjh] ekStk esok] rglhy Hkksjat] ftyk gehjiqj]

fgekpy izns'k

- - izkfFkZuA

cuke

vke turk

izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 13 ¼3½ tUe ,oa eqR;q iathdj.k vf/kfu;e 1969-

Jherh ehjka nsoh iRuh Jh gal jkt] oklh Vhdk ledjh] ekStk esok] rglhy Hkksjat] ftyk gehjiqj]

fgekpy izns'k us bl vnkyr esa 'kiFk&i= lfgr vkosnu fd;k gS fd mlds yM+ds jktsUnz dqekj iq=

Jh gal jkt dh e`R;q 9&2&2010 dks xkao ledjh esa gqbZ gS] ijUrq xzke iapk;r Hkyokuh esa e`R;q frfFk

iath—r ugha gqbZ gSA ftlds iathdj.k ckjs xzke iapk;r Hkyokuh dks vkns'k fn, tk,aA

bl uksfVl@b'rgkj }kjk vke turk dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh O;fDr fo'ks"k dks

vkosfndk ds yM+ds jktsUnz dqekj dh e`R;q dh frfFk ds iathdj.k ckjs dksbZ mtj@,rjkt gks rks og viuk

,rjkt bl vnkyr esa 31&8&2011 dks izkr% 10 cts vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj izLrqr dj

ldrk gS vU;Fkk izkfFkZu ds 'kiFk&i= ds vk/kkj ij yM+ds jktsUnz dqekj dh e`R;q dh frfFk ds iathdj.k

ds vkns'k xzke iapk;r Hkyokuh dks ikfjr dj fn, tk,axsA

vkt fnukad 19&7&2011 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

dqynhi ifV;ky]

dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh]

Hkksjat] ftyk gehjiqj ¼fg0 iz0½A

&&&&&&&

c vnkyr tukc lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] Tokyh] ftyk dkaxM+k] fgekpy izns'k

Jh ulhc flag iq= Jh Kku pUn] fuoklh egky txysVk@Hkjhy o ekStk fla;wguh] rglhy Tokyh]

ftyk dkaxM+k] fgekpy izns'kA

cuke

vke turk

izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 13 ¼3½ tUe ,oa e`R;q iathdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1969-

Jh ulhc flag iq= Jh Kku flag] xkao txysVk] Mk0 f=yksdiqj] rglhy Tokyh us bl vnkyr esa

izkFkZUkk&i= xqtkjk gS fd mlds iq= n{k jk.kk iq= Jh ulhc flag dk tUe fnukad 17&9&2008 dks xkao

txysVk@Hkjhy esa gqvk Fkk tks xyrh ls iapk;r fjdkMZ esa iathd`r ugha djok ldkA vc og tUe frfFk

iapk;r fjdkMZ esa ntZ djokuk pkgrk gSA

2511

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

vr% bl uksfVl ds ek/;e ls loZlk/kkj.k dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh O;fDr dks

mijksDr iathdj.k ds ckjs esa dksbZ mtj o ,rjkt gks rks og fnukad 31&10&2011 dks lqcg 10-00 cts

bl U;k;ky; esa vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj is'k dj ldrk gS vU;Fkk gkftj u vkus dh lwjr

esa ,drjQk dk;Zokgh vey esa ykbZ tkdj tUe frfFk iapk;r fjdkMZ esa iathd`r djus ds vkns'k ikfjr

dj fn, tk,axsA mlds mijkUr dksbZ ,rjkt u lquk tk,xkA

vkt fnukad 17&8&2011 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&

lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

Tokyh] ftyk dkaxM+k] fgekpy izns'kA

&&&&&&&

c vnkyr tukc ujs'k dqekj] rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] Tokyh] ftyk dkaxM+k]

fgekpy izns'k

Jh jk;s flag mQZ Qdhj pUn iq= Jh gks'kukdw] lkdu veysyk] rglhy Tokyh] ftyk dkaxM+k]

fgekpy izns'k

cuke

vke turk

fo"k;-&&uke n#Lrh ckjs izkFkZuk&i=A

1- Jh jk;s flag mQZ Qdhj pUn iq= Jh gks'kukdw] lkdu veysyk] rglhy Tokyh] ftyk dkaxM+k]

fgekpy izns'k us bl U;k;ky; esa izkFkZUkk&i= fn;k gS fd mldk uke dkxtkr eky esa jk;s flag ntZ gS

tcfd iapk;r fjdkMZ esa mldk uke Qdhj pUn gSA rFkk ;g nksuksa uke ,d gh vkneh ds gSaA

2- izkFkÊ jk;s flag mQZ Qdhj pUn ds firk dk uke gks'kukdw gSA ijUrq xyrh ls mlds firk dk

uke gks'k;k: ntZ gks x;k gSA vr% izkFkÊ viuk o vius firk dk uke Bhd djokuk pkgrk gSA

vr% bl b'rgkj }kjk vke turk dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn mDr uke dh n#Lrh gsrq

fdlh dks dksbZ ,rjkt gks rks og fnukad 31&10&2011 dks U;k;ky; esa mifLFkr gksdj vlkyru ;k

odkyru ,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gS vU;Fkk gkftj u vkus dh lwjr esa ,drjQk dk;Zokgh vey esa ykbZ

tkdj n#Lrh ds vkns'k ikfjr dj fn, tk,axsA

vkt fnukad 17&8&2011 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

ujs'k dqekj]

rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

Tokyh] ftyk dkaxM+k] fgekpy izns'kA

2512

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

In the Court of Special Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Manali, District

Kullu, Himachal Pradesh

In the matter of :

Mr. Chaman Lal s/o Shri Rewat Ram, r/o Village & P.O. old Manali, Tehsil Manali, District

Kullu (H. P.)

and

Mrs. Anna Ly Senko d/o Mr. Igor, r/o Town Nalchik, Kabardino Balkars Kaya Republic

Shogentsukova Street H. No. 38 Apartment No. 162 Zip Postal Code 360051M Repulic Russia, (at

present w/o Shri Chaman Lal s/o Shri Rewat Ram, r/o Village & P.O. old Manali, Tehsil Manali,

District Kullu, (H.P.) Passport No. 710462649, Visa No. AP 1822007.

Versus

General Public

An application for registration of marriage under Special Marriage Act, 1954.

Whereas Mr. Chaman Lal s/o Shri Rewat Ram, r/o Village & P.O. old Manali, Tehsil

Manali, District Kullu, (H.P.) and Mrs. Anna Ly Senko d/o Mr. Igor, r/o Town Nalchik, Kabardino

Balkars Kaya Republic Shogentsukova Street H. No. 38 Apartment No. 162 Zip Postal Code

360051M Repulic Russia, (at present w/o Shri Chaman Lal s/o Shri Rewat Ram, r/o Village & P.O.

old Manali, Tehsil Manali, District Kullu, (H.P.) Passport No. 710462649, Visa No. AP 1822007

has presented an application on 27-7-2011 in this Court for the registration of marriage under

Special Marriage Act, 1954. Hence this proclamation is hereby issued for the information of

general public that if any person has any objection for the registration of the above marriage can

appear in this court on 26-8-2011 at 2.00 P. M. to object registration of above marriage personally or

through an authorized agent failing which this marriage will be registered under this Act, 1954

accordingly.

Given under my hand and seal of the Court on 27^th day of July, 2011.

Seal.

Sd/-

Special Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate,

Manali, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.

_________

In the Court of Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar Mandi, District

Mandi, Himachal Pradesh

In the matter of :

1.

Shri Deepak Kapoor s/o Dr. Dharam Pal Kapoor, r/o H. No. 46/11, Tarna Road, Mandi

Town District Mandi, H.P.

2.

Smt. Bhavna d/o Sh. Desh Raj, r/o H. No. 24/8 Darmayana Muhalla Mandi Town

District Mandi, H.P. (At present wife of Shri Deepak Kapoor s/o Dr. Dharam Pal

Kapoor, r/o H.No. 46/11, Tarna Road, Mandi Town District Mandi, H.P.) . .

Applicants.

2513

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

Versus

General public

Subject.—Application for the registration of marriage under section 15 of Special Marriage Act,

1954.

Shri Deepak Kapoor s/o Dr. Dharam Pal Kapoor, r/o H.N. 46/11, Tarna Road, Mandi Town

District Mandi, H.P. and Smt. Bhavna d/o Sh. Desh Raj, r/o H.No. 24/8 Darmayana Muhalla Mandi

Town District Mandi, H.P. (At present wife Shri Deepak Kapoor s/o Dr. Dharam Pal Kapoor, r/o

H. No. 46/11, Tarna Road, Mandi Town District Mandi, H.P.) have filed an application alongwith

affidavits in the Court of undersigned under section 15 of Special Marriage Act, 1954 that they

have solemnized their marriage on 9-6-2011 according to Hindu rites and customs at their

respective houses and they are living together as husband and wife since then, hence their marriage

may be registered under Special Marriage Act, 1954.

Therefore, the general public is hereby informed through this notice that any person who

has any objection regarding this marriage can file the objection personally or in writing before this

court on or before 11^th September, 2011 after that no objection will be entertained and marriage

will be registered.

Issued today on 11^th day of August, 2011 under my hand and seal of the court.

Seal. Sd/-

Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate,

Sadar Mandi, District Mandi (H. P.).

_______

vt vnkyr lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

fely ua0 % 19 rkjh[k ejtqvk % 01&6&2010 rkjh[k is'kh % 06&8&2011

Jh lks<k jke iq= Jh eaxyw jke] fuoklh dksVyk] Mkd?kj fpOc.kw] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk

e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

^{- -}izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

^{- -} Qjhd nks;eA

izkFkZuk&i= jktLo vfHkys[k esa uke n#Lrh bZUnzkt ckjsA

izkFkhZ Jh lks<k jke iq= Jh eaxyw jke] fuoklh dksVyk] Mkd?kj fpOc.kw] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj]

ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k us bl U;k;ky; esa Hkwfe [kkrk uEcj 35@34] 56@56] [kljk uEcj 2717]

jdck rknknh 0&5&2 ch?kk fLFkr egky usj dksVyk] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj dh n#Lrh [kljk fxjnkojh

ckjs izkFkZuk&i= iszf"kr fd;k gSA izfroknhx.k loZJh jsyw jke iq= eaxyw jke] ckye iq= ghjk yky] fpUrk

nsoh iq=h ghjk yky] jrh jke iq= eaxyw] jks'kuh nsoh iq=h jes'k pUn] js[kk nsoh] iwue iq=h es| flag o I;kj

flag] xaxk jke] dj flag] vej flag iq=x.k iks|h dks bl U;k;ky; }kjk mifLFkr gksus ckjs dbZ ckj leu

Hksts x,] ijUrq mudh rkehy ugha gks ik jgh gSA

2514

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

vr% mijksDr izfroknhx.k dks bl b'rgkj }kjk lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd og fnukad 6&9&2011

dks izkr% 10-00 cts vlkyru ;k odkyru bl U;k;ky; esa gkftj gksdj vius mtj@,rjkt is'k djsa

vU;Fkk xSj&gktjh dh lwjr esa ,drjQk dk;Zokgh vey esa ykbZ tk,xhA

vkt fnukad 6&8&2011 dks gekjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&

lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'kA

__________

vt vnkyr lgk;d lekgrkZ f}rh; Js.kh] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

fely ua0 % 28 rkjh[k ejtqvk % 07&5&2011 rkjh[k is'kh % 27&8&2011

Jh nysj flag iq= Jh neksnj nkl] fuoklh >yx.k] rglhy yM HkM+ksy] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy

izns'k

- - izkfFkZuA

cuke

vke turk

^{- -} Qjhd nks;eA

nj[okLr cjk, iathdj.k olh;rukek /kkjk 40 ¼41½ vf/kfu;e] 1938 ds vUrxZrA

Jh nysj flag iq= Jh neksnj nkl] fuoklh >yx.k] rglhy yM HkM+ksy] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy

izns'k us bl U;k;ky; esa vkosnu&i= xqtkjdj vuqjks/k fd;k gS fd lEcfU/kr tks olh;r Jherh uS.kh nsoh

fo/kok Jh fpeuw jke] fuoklh NkEc] Mkd?kj [kMhgkj] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj us esjs uke dj j[kh gS] og

vHkh rd iath—r ugha gqbZ gSA vc dh tkosA

vr% loZlk/kkj.k dks bl b'rgkj mn~?kks"k.kk ds ek/;e ls lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh

O;fDr dks mDr nkok ckjk dksbZ mtj ,rjkt gks rks og fnukad 27&8&2011 dks izkr% 10-00 cts

vlkyru ;k odkyru bl U;k;ky; esa gkftj gksdj vius mtj@,rjkt is'k djs vU;Fkk xSj&gktjh dh

lwjr esa ,drjQk dk;Zokgh vey esa ykbZ tk,xhA

vkt fnukad 27&7&2011 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&

lgk;d lekgrkZ f}rh; Js.kh]

rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'kA

&&&&&&

c vnkyr Jh jRu xkSre] LiS'ky eSfjt vf/kdkjh ¼,l0 Mh0 ,e0½] tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh]

fgekpy izns'k

c eqdÌek %

1-

Jh ohjsUnz dqekj iq= Jh c`t yky] fuoklh Nrj] Mk0 tyisgM+] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj]

ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

¼ifr½A

2-

Jherh iq"ik nsoh iq=h Jh 'ke'ksj flag gky mifLFkr iRuh Jh ohjsUnz dqekj] fuoklh Nrj]

Mk0 tyisgM+] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

¼iRuh½A

cuke

vke turk

2515

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 15] pSIVj&III LiS'ky eSfjt ,DV] 1954 ds vUrxZr fookg iathdj.k djus ckjsA

mijksDr ekeys esa Jh ohjsUnz dqekj o Jherh iq"ik nsoh us bl U;k;ky; esa izkFkZuk&i= is'k fd;k gS

fd mUgksaus fnukad 30&5&2010 dks xkao Nrj] Mk0 tyisgM+] rglhy tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy

izns'k esa fgUnw jhfr&fjokt ds vuqlkj 'kknh dj yh gS vkSj rc ls og ifr&iRuh ds :i esa jgrs pys vk

jgs gSaA vr% tsj /kkjk 15 pSIVj-III LiS'ky eSfjt ,DV] 1954 ds vUrxZr mudk fookg iath—r fd;k

tkosA

vr% vke turk o muds fj'rsnkjksa@ekrk&firk dks bl b'rgkj }kjk lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd

;fn fdlh Hkh O;fDr dks bl ckjs dksbZ mtj@,rjkt gks rks og fnukad 19&9&2011 dks nksigj 2-00 cts

;k blls iwoZ vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vnkyr gksdj is'k djs vU;Fkk ,drjQk dk;Zokgh vey esa

ykbZ tkdj 'kknh iathdj.k izek.k&i= tkjh dj fn;k tk,xk rFkk ckn esa dksbZ Hkh mtj dkfcys lek;r

u gksxkA

vkt fnukad 20&8&2011 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj U;k;ky; ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

jRu xkSre]

LiS'ky eSfjt vf/kdkjh ¼,l0 Mh0 ,e0½]

tksfxUnz uxj] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'kA

&&&&&&&&

vt U;k;ky; lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] rglhy yM&HkM+ksy] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

fely ua0

rkjh[k ejtqvk

rkjh[k is'kh

&&&&&&

&&&&&&&&&&

&&&&&&&&

6@2011

12&7&2011

29&8&2011

Jh eku flag lqiq= Jh gfj;k] fuoklh iV~Vk] Mkd?kj [kM+hgkj <kjk] rglhy yM&HkM+ksy] ftyk

e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

- - izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

- - izfroknhA

jktLo vfHkys[k egky rqykg esa uke dh n#Lrh ckjs vkosnu&i=A

Jh eku flag lqiq= Jh gfj;k] fuoklh iV~Vk] Mkd?kj [kM+hgkj <kjk] rglhy yM&HkM+ksy] ftyk

e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k us bl U;k;ky; esa vkosnu&i= xqtkjdj vuqjks/k fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ dk okLrfod

uke eku flag gS tks izkFkhZ ds lHkh vfHkys[kksa] nLrkostksa esa Hkh ntZ gSA ijUrq izkFkhZ dk uke jktLo vfHkys[k

egky rqykg esa Hkkx flag ntZ gqvk gSA tksfd xyr ntZ gqvk gS ftldh n#Lrh ds vkns'k fn, tk,aA

2516

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 26 vxLr] 2011@4 Hkknzin] 1933

vr% loZlk/kkj.k dks bl b'rgkj ds ek/;e ls lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh O;fDr dks

izkFkhZ ds uke dh n#Lrh jktLo vfHkys[k egky rqykg esa djus ckjs dksbZ mtj ;k ,rjkt gks rks og

fnukad 29&8&2011 dks izkr% 10-00 cts vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vnkyr gksdj viuk

mtj@,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gS vU;Fkk xSj&gktjh dh lwjr esa ,drjQk dk;Zokgh vey esa ykbZ tk,xhA

vkt fnukad 19&8&2011 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&

lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

rglhy yM&HkM+ksy] ftyk e.Mh] fgekpy izns'k

fu;U=d] eqnz.k rFkk ys[ku lkexzh] fgekpy izns'k] f'keyk&5 }kjk eqfnzr rFkk izdkf'kr