jkti=] fgekpy izns'k

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

f”keyk] eaxyokj] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

fgekpy izns'k ljdkj

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171 001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 20^th January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.6 (24)74-Part.—The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, in exercise of the

powers vested U/S 12(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been pleased to appoint

Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-JMIC (I), Dharamshala as Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

for Kangra Division, authorizing him to look after the urgent work pertaining to Civil and Sessions

Division, Kangra w.e.f. 3-2-2014 to 11-2-2014.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

232&jkti=@2014&28&1&2014 ¼6165½

6166

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171 001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 16^th January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.16 (8)74-III.—Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice, in exercise of the powers

vested in him U/S 139(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, U/S 297(b) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 and Rule 5(vi) of the H.P. Oath Commissioners (Appointment & Control) Rules,

2007 has been pleased to appoint Shri Ashwani Kumar (Enrl. No. 331/HIM/2011) and Shri

Ashwani Kumar (Enrl. No. 204/HIM/2011), Advocates, Hamirpur as Oath Commissioners at

Hamirpur, for a period of two years, with immediate effect, for administering oaths and

affirmations on affidavits to the deponents, under the aforesaid Codes and Rules.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

_________

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171 001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 15^th January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.16 (15)74-Part.—Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice, has been pleased to

cancel the appointment of Ms. Manju Bala, Advocate as Oath Commissioner, Solan, appointed vide

Registry Notification No. HHC/Admn. 16(15)74-V-9063-72, dated 22-3-2012, with immediate

effect, as recommended by the District and Sessions Judge, Solan.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

__________

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171 001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 17th January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.16 (7)-Part.—Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice, in exercise of the powers

vested in him U/S 139(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, U/S 297(b) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 and Rule 5(vi) of the H.P. Oath Commissioners (Appointment & Control) Rules,

2007 has been pleased to appoint Ms. Shikha Hans, Advocate, Dharamshala, as Oath

Commissioner at Dharamshala, for a period of two years with immediate effect for administering

oaths and affirmations on affidavits to the deponents, under the aforesaid Codes and Rules.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

6167

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171 001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 17th January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.16 (7)-Part.—Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice, in exercise of the powers

vested in him U/S 139(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, U/S 297(b) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 and Rule 5(vi) of the H.P. Oath Commissioners (Appointment & Control) Rules,

2007 has been pleased to appoint Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhiman, Advocate, Kangra as Oath

Commissioner at Kangra with immediate effect for a period of two years, for administering oaths

and affirmations on affidavits to the deponents, under the aforesaid Codes and Rules.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

_________

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171 001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 22nd January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.6 (24)74-Part.—The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, in exercise of the

powers vested U/S 12(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been pleased to appoint

Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-JMIC, Chamba as Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate for

Chamba Division, authorizing him to look after the urgent work pertaining to Civil and Sessions

Division, Chamba w.e.f. 2-2-2014 to 16-2-2014.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

_________

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 22^nd January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.6 (23)/74-XV.—Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice in exercise of the

powers vested in him under Rule 2 (32) of Chapter 1 of H.P. Financial Rules, 2009 has been

pleased to declare Civil Judge (Senior Division)-cum-ACJM (I), Amb, District Una, H.P. as

Drawing and Disbursing Officer in respect of the Courts of Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-

JMIC (II), Amb and Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-JMIC (III), Amb and also the Controlling

Officer for the purpose of salary, T.A. etc. in respect of establishment attached to the aforesaid

Courts under Major Head “2014-Administration of Justice” with immediate effect till the posting of

new Presiding Officer in those Courts.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

6168

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-171001

NOTIFICATION

Shimla, the 22^nd January, 2014

No.HHC/Admn.6 (23)/74-XV.—Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice in exercise of the

powers vested in him under Rule 2 (32) of Chapter 1 of H.P. Financial Rules, 2009 has been

pleased to declare Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-JMIC, Chamba as Drawing and Disbursing

Officer in respect of the Courts of District & Sessions Judge, Chamba; Additional District &

Sessions Judge, Chamba;

Civil Judge (Senior Division)-cum-CJM, Chamba and Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-

JMIC, Dalhousie and also the Controlling Officer for the purpose of salary, T.A. etc. in respect of

establishment attached to the aforesaid Courts under Major Head “2014-Administration of Justice”

w.e.f. 2-2-2014 to 16-2-2014.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

_________

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA-171001

CORRIGENDUM

Shimla, the 24^th January, 2014

No. HHC/LIB.1(5-D.L.T.)/89.—In continuation of tender notice No. HCC/LIB.1.(5-

D.L.T.)/89-588-89, dated 6-1-2014, published on the website of High Court of H.P. and also in two

newspapers “The Tribune”dated 09-01-2014 and “Amar Ujala” dated 08-01-2014, Chandigarh

Editions, inviting sealed tenders from the reputed publishers and suppliers for the supply of

Commentary on Law books/Bare Acts (latest edition) for High Court valuing approximately Rs.

25,63,120/- and for subordinate Courts valuing approximately Rs. 6,70,000/-, the following terms

and conditions may please be read in addition to the terms and conditions already published in the

aforesaid tender notice:

Additional Terms and Conditions of the Tender

Every tender should be accompanied by an earnest money to the extent of 5% of the tender

amount in the shape of demand draft or bank guarantee in the name of Registrar General,

High Court of H.P., Shimla. The tender(s) received without earnest money shall be liable to

be rejected. In case any supplier has already furnished the quotation/tender, then they are

also required to pay the earnest money at the rate of 5% of the tender amount so as to reach

in the office of Registrar General, High Court of H.P., Shimla on or before 17-2-2014. In

case the tenderer, who has already submitted his tender fails to furnish the earnest money to

the extent of 5% of the total tender amount by 17-2-2014, then his tender/quotation shall not

be taken into consideration and liable to be rejected.

The successful tenderer shall have to deposit the performance security to the extent of 5%

of the value of the contract within a week after the acceptance of the contract.

6169

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

The earnest money of unsuccessful tenderer shall be returned to them on finalisation of the

tender process and the earnest money of successful tenderer as well as the performance

security to be deposited by the successful tenderer(s) shall be retained by the Registrar

General, High Court of H.P. till the completion of the entire supply of books being the

subject matter of the contract.

By order,

Sd/-

Registrar General.

___________

i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx

vf/klwpuk

f'keyk&2] 21 tuojh] 2014

la[;k% ,lVhbZ&ch ¼2½&8@2010-&&fgekpy izns'k dh jkT;iky] Hkkjr ds lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn

309 ds ijUrqd }kjk iznRr 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] fgekpy izns'k yksd lsok vk;ksx ds ijke'kZ ls

i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx] fgekpy izns'k esa vuqla/kku lgk;d] oxZ&III ¼vjktif=r½

vfyfid oxhZ; lsok,a] ds in ds fy, bl vf/klwpuk ls layXu mikcU/k&^d* ds vuqlkj HkrhZ vkSj izksUufr

fu;e cukrh gS] vFkkZr%&&

1- laf{kIr uke vkSj izkjEHk-&&¼1½ bu fu;eksa dk laf{kIr uke fgekpy izns'k i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa

izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx] esa vuqla/kku lgk;d] oxZ&III ¼vjktif=r½] vfyfid oxhZ; lsok,a] HkrhZ vkSj izksUufr

fu;e] 2013 gS A

¼2½ ;s fu;e jkti=] fgekpy izns'k esa izdkf'kr gksus dh rkjh[k ls izo`r gkasxsA

vkns'k }kjk]

gLrk{kfjr@&

iz/kku lfpo¼i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh½A

&&&&&&&&&

mikcU/k&^^d**

fgekpy izns”k i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx] esa vuqla/kku lgk;d] oxZ&III ¼vjktif=r½]

vfyfid oxhZ; lsok,a ds in ds fy, HkrhZ vkSj izksUufr fu;e

1- in dk uke-&&vuqla/kku lgk;dA

2- inksa dh la[;k-&&2 ¼nks½A

3- oxhZdj.k-&&oxZ&III ¼vjktif=r½] vfyfid oxhZ; lsok,aA

4- Oksrueku-&&¼i½ fu;fer vH;kfFkZ;ksa ds fy, osrueku #0 10300&34800 #Ik;s tek 3800 #Ik;s

xzsM isA

¼ii½ lafonk ij fu;qDr deZpkfj;ksa ds fy, miyfC/k;ka% LrEHk la[;k% 15&d esa fn, x, C;kSjs ds

vuqlkj 14100 #Ik, izfreklA

6170

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

5- p;u in vFkok vp;u in-&&Ykkxw ugha A

6- Lkh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk;q-&&18 ls 45 o"kZ %

ijUrq lh/ks HkrhZ fd, tkus okys O;fDr;ksa ds fy, Åijh vk;q lhek] rnFkZ ;k lafonk ds vk/kkj ij

fu;qDr fd, x, O;fDr;ksa lfgr] igys ls gh ljdkj dh lsok esa jr vH;fFkZ;ksa dks ykxw ugha gksxh(

ijUrq ;g vkSj fd ;fn rnFkZ vk/kkj ij fu;qDr fd;k x;k vH;FkhZ bl #i esa fu;qfDr dh rkjh[k

dks vf/kd vk;q dk gks x;k gks] rks og rnFkZ ;k lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr ds dkj.k fofgr vk;q esa NwV

ds fy, ik= ughsa gksxk(

ijUrq ;g vkSj fd vuqlwfpr tkfr;ksa@vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa rFkk vU; oxksZa ds O;fDr;ksa ds fy,

Åijh vk;q lhek esa mruh gh NwV nh tk ldsxh] ftruh fgekpy izns'k ljdkj ds lk/kkj.k ;k fo'ks"k

vkns'k ds v/khu vuqKs; gS(

ijUrq ;g vkSj fd ifCyd lsDVj] fuxeksa rFkk Lok;Ÿk fudk;ksa ds lHkh deZpkfj;ksa dks] tks ,sls

ifCyd lsDVj fuxeksa rFkk Lok;Ÿk fudk;ksa ds izkjfEHkd xBu ds le; ,sls ifCyd lsDVj fuxeksa@Lok;Ÿk

fudk;ksa esa vkesyu ls iwoZ] ljdkjh deZpkjh Fks] lh/kh HkrhZ esa vk;q dh lhek esa ,slh gh fj;k;r nh tk,xh]

tSlh ljdkjh deZpkfj;ksa dks vuqKs; gS] fdUrq bl izdkj dh fj;k;r ifCyd lsDVj] fuxeksa rFkk Lok;Ÿk

fudk;ksa ds ,sls deZpkfjo`Un dks ugha nh tk,xh] tks i'pkr~orhZ ,sls fuxeksa@Lok;Ÿk fudk;ksa }kjk fu;qDr

fd, x, Fks@ fd, x, gSa vkSj mu ifCyd lsDVj fuxeksa@Lok;Ÿk fudk;ksa ds izkjfEHkd xBu ds i'pkr~

,sls fuxeksa@Lok;Ÿk fudk;ksa dh lsok esa vfUre #i ls vkesfyr fd, x, gSa@fd, x, Fks %

¼1½ lh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk;q lhek dh x.kuk ml o"kZ ds izFke fnol ls dh tk,xh] ftlesa in

¼inksa½ dks vkosnu vkefU=r djus ds fy,] ;FkkfLFkfr] foKkfir fd;k x;k gS ;k

fu;kstuky;ksa dks vf/klwfpr fd;k x;k gSA

¼2½ vU;Fkk lqvfgZr vH;fFkZ;ksa dh n'kk esa lh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vk;q lhek vkSj vuqHko] fgekpy

izns'k yksd lsok vk;ksx ds foosdkuqlkj f'kfFky dh tk ldsxhA

7- Lkh/ks HkrhZ fd, tkus okys O;fDr;ksa ds fy, visf{kr U;wure 'kSf{kd vkSj vU; vgZrk,a-&&¼d½

vfuok;Z vgZrk% fdlh ekU;rk izkIr fo'ofo|ky; ;k dsUnzh;@fgekpy izns”k ljdkj }kjk lH;d :Ik ls

ekU;rk izkIr laLFkk ls Ik;kZoj.k foKku esa Lukrdksrj dh mikf/k ;k Ik;kZoj.k foKku ;k Ik;kZoj.k

bathfu;fjax ¼;kfU=dh½ esa ch0 bZ0@ch0 VSd dh mikf/k izkIr dh gks A

¼[k½ okaNuh; vgZrk-&&fgekpy izns'k dh #f<+;ksa] jhfr;ksa vkSj cksfy;ksa dk Kku vkSj izns'k esa

fo|eku fof'k"V n'kkvksa esa fu;qfDr ds fy, mi;qDrrkA

8- Lkh/ks HkrhZ fd, tkus okys O;fDr;ksa ds fy, fofgr vk;q vkSj 'kSf{kd vgZrk,a izksUur O;fDr;ksa

dh n'kk esa ykxw gksaxh ;k ugha-&&vk;q% ykxw ugh

'kSf{kd vgZrk,a % ykxw ugha A

9- Ikfjoh{kk dh vof/k] ;fn dksbZ gks-&&nks o"kZ] ftldk ,d o"kZ ls vuf/kd ,slh vkSj vof/k ds

fy, foLrkj fd;k tk ldsxk tSlk l{ke izkf/kdkjh fo'ks"k ifjfLFkfr;ksa eas vkSj fyf[kr dkj.kksa ls vkns'k nsA

10- HkrhZ dh i}fr% HkrhZ lh/kh gksxh ;k izksUufr] izfrfu;qfDr] LFkkukUrj.k }kjk vkSj fofHkUu

i}fr;ksa }kjk Hkjs tkus okys in ¼inksa½ dh izfr'krrk-&&“kr izfr'kr lSd.MeSV vk/kkj ij A ,slk u gksus

ij] ;FkkfLFkfr] lh/kh HkrhZ }kjk fu;fer vk/kkj ij ;k lafonk ds vk/kkj HkrhZ }kjk A

6171

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

11- izksUufr] lSd.MeSaV] ekU;rk izkIr Ik;kZoj.k foKku esa Lukrdksrj mikf/k ;k LFkkukUrj.k dh

n'kk esa Jsf.k;ka] ftuesa ls [email protected]@LFkkukUrj.k fd;k tk,xk-&&Ik;kZoj.k foKku ;k Ik;kZoj.k

bZthfu;fjax esa ch0 bZ0@ch0 VSd dh mikf/k /kkj.k djus ds v/;/khu vkSj fgekpy izns”k ljdkj ds vU;

foHkkxksa@cksZMksa@fuxeksa@Lok;Ÿk fudk;ksa esa le:Ik osrueku esa dk;Zjr bl in ds in/kkfj ¼;ksa½ esa ls

lSd.MeSaV vk/kkj ij A

12- ;fn foHkkxh; izksUufr lfefr fo|eku gks] rks mldh lajpuk-&&Ykkxw ugha A

13- HkrhZ djus esa ftu ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa fgekpy izns”k yksd lsok vk;ksx ls ijke'kZ fy;k

tk,xk-&&tSlk fof/k }kjk vkisf{kr gks A

14- Lkh/kh HkrhZ ds fy, vfuok;Z vis{kk-&&fdlh lsok ;k in ij fu;qfDr ds fy, vH;FkhZ dk Hkkjr

dk ukxfjd gksuk vfuok;Z gS A

15- Lkh/kh HkrhZ }kjk in ij fu;qfDr ds fy, p;u-&&Lkh/kh HkrhZ ds ekeys esa] in ij fu;qfDr ds

fy, p;u] ekSf[kd ijh{kk ds vk/kkj ij] fd;k tk,xk] ;fn] ;FkkfLFkfr] fgekpy izns'k yksd lsok vk;ksx

;k vU; HkrhZ izkf/kdj.k ,slk djuk vko';d ;k lehphu le>s] rks fyf[kr ijh{kk ;k O;kogkfjd ijh{kk ds

vk/kkj ij fd;k tk,xk; ftldk Lrj@ikB~;Øe vkfn ;FkkfLFkfr] vk;ksx@vU; HkrhZ izkf/kdj.k }kjk

vo/kkfjr fd;k tk,xk A

15d- lafonk fu;qfDr }kjk in ij fu;qfDr ds fy, p;u-&&bu fu;eksa esa fdlh ckr ds gksrs gq,

Hkh in ij lafonk fu;qfDr;ka uhps fn, x, fucU/kuksa vkSj “krksZa ds v/;/khu dh tk,axh%&&

¼I½ ladYiuk-&&¼d½ bl iWkfylh ds v/khu fgekpy izns'k i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx

esa vuqla/kku lgk;d dks lafonk ds vk/kkj ij izkjEHk esa ,d o"kZ ds fy, yxk;k tk,xk] ftls o’kkZuqo’kZ

vk/kkj ij c<+k;k tk ldsxk %

ijUrq lafonk dh vof/k esa o’kkZuqo’kZ vk/kkj ij [email protected] ds fy, lEc) foHkkxk/;{k ;g

izek.k&i= tkjh djsxk fd lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr dh lsok rFkk vkpj.k ml o’kZ ds nkSjku lUrks’ktud

jgk gS vkSj dsoy rHkh lafonk dh vof/k uohd`r@foLrkfjr dh tk,xh A

¼[k½ in dk fgekpy izns’k v/khuLFk cksMZ ds dk;Z{ks= esa vkuk-&&funs”kd] Ik;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa

izks|ksfxdh foHkkx fjDr inksa dks lafonk ds vk/kkj ij Hkjus ds fy, ljdkj dk vuqeksnu izkIr djus ds

Ik”pkr v/;is{kk dks lEc) HkrhZ vfHkZdj.k vFkkZr~ fgekpy izns”k v/khUkLFk lsok,a p;u cksMZ] gehjiqj ds

le{k j[ksxk A

¼x½ p;u] bu fu;eksa esa fofgr ik=rk@“krksZa ds vuqlkj fd;k tk,xk A

¼II½ lafonkRed miyfC/k;ka-&&Lkafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;qDr vuqla/kku lgk;d dks 14100@&:i,

dh lesfdr fu;r lafonkRed jde ¼tks is cS.M ds U;wure tek xzsM is ds cjkcj gksxh½ izfrekl lanr dh

tk,xh A ;fn lafonk esa ,d o’kZ ls vf/kd dh c<kSrjh dh tkrh gS rks Ik”pkr~oorhZ o’kZ ¼o’kksZ½ ds fy,

lafonkRed miyfC/k;ksa esa 423@&#i, in ds iS cS.M dk U;wure tek xzsM iS dk rhu izfr”kr dh jde

okf’kZd o`f) ds :Ik esa vuqKkr dh tk,xh A

¼III½ fu;qfDr@vuq'kklu izkf/kdkjh-&&funs”kd] i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx] fgekpy

izns”k fu;qfDr vkSj vuq”kklu izkf/kdkjh gksxk A

¼IV½ p;u izfØ;k-&&Lkafonk fu;qfDr dh n”kk esa in ij fu;qfDr ds fy, p;u] ekSf[kd ijh{kk ds

vk/kkj ij fd;k tk,xk ;k ;fn vko”;d ;k lehphu le>k tk,] rks fyf[kr ijh{kk ;k O;kogkfjd ijh{kk

6172

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

ds vk/kkj ij fd;k tk,xk] ftldk Lrj@ikB;Øe bR;kfn lac) HkrhZ vfHkdj.k vFkkZr~ fgekpy izns”k

v/khuLFk lsok,a p;u cksMZ] gehjiqj }kjk vo/kkfjr fd;k tk,xk A

¼V½ lafonkRed fu;qfDr;ksa ds fy, p;u lfefr-&&tSlh lEc) HkrhZ vfHkdj.k vFkkZr~ fgekpy

v/khUkLFk p;u cksMZ }kjk le;≤ ij xfBr dh tk, A

¼VI½ djkj-&&vH;FkhZ dks] p;u ds i”pkr~ bu fu;eksa ls layXu mikcU/k&ß[kÞ ds vuqlkj djkj

gLrk{kfjr djuk gksxk A

¼VII½ fucU/ku vkSj “krsZa-&&¼d½ lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;qDr O;fDr dks 14100@&#i, dh fu;r

lafonkRed jde ¼tks is cS.M ds U;wure tek xzsM is ds cjkcj gksxh½ izfrekl lanr dh tk,xh A lafonk

ij fu;qDr O;fDr vkxs c<+k, x, o’kZ ¼o’kksZa½ ds fy, lafonkRed jde esa 423@&#i, ¼in ds is cS.M dk

U;wure tek xzsM is dk rhu izfr”kr½ dh o`f) dk gdnkj gksxk vkSj vU; dksbZ lgc) lqfo/kk,a tSls

ofj’B@p;u osrueku vkfn ugha fn;k tk,xk A

¼[k½ lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr dh lsok iw.kZr;k vLFkk;h vk/kkj ij gksxhA ;fn lafonk ij fu;qDr

O;fDr dk dk;[email protected] Bhd ugha ik;k tkrk gS] rks fu;qfDr lekIr fd, tkus ds fy, nk;h gksxh A

¼x½ Lkafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr ,d ekl dh lsok iwjh djus ds i”pkr~ ,d fnu ds vkdfLed

vodk”k dk gdnkj gksxk A rFkkfi lafonk ij fu;qDr deZpkjh ckjg lIrkg ds izlwfr vodk”k vkSj nl

fnu ds fpfdRlk vodk”k ds fy, Hkh gdnkj gksxk@gksxh A og fpfdRlk izfriwfrZ vkSj ,y0Vh0lh0

bR;kfn ds fy, Hkh gdnkj ugha gksxk@gksxh A lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr dks mijksDr ds flok; o vU;

fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vodk”k vuqKkr ugha gksxk %

ijUrq vuqiHkqDr vkdfLed vodk”k vkSj fpfdRlk vodk”k ,d dyS.Mj o’kZ rd lafpr fd;k tk

ldsxk vkSj vkxkeh dyS.Mj o’kZ ds fy, vxzuhr ugha fd;k tk,xk A

¼?k½ fu;U=d vf/kdkjh ds vuqeksnu ds fcuk lsok ls vuf/kd`r vuqifLFkfr ls Lor% gh Lkafonk dk

i;kZolku ¼lekiu½ gks tk,xk A lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr] dŸkZO; ¼M~;wfV½ ls vuqifLFkfr dh vof/k ds

fy, lafonkRed jde dk gdnkj ugha gksxk A

¼³½ lafonk ds vk/kkj ij fu;qDr in/kkjh] ftlus rSukrh ds ,d LFkku ij rhu o’kZ dk dk;Zdky

iw.kZ dj fy;k gks] vko”;drk ds vk/kkj ij LFkkukUrj.k gsrq ik= gksxk] tgka Hkh iz”kklfud vk/kkj ij ,slk

djuk visf{kr gks A

¼p½ p;fur vH;FkhZ dks ljdkjh@jftLVªhd`r fpfdRlk O;olk;h ls viuk vkjksX;rk izek.k&i=

izLrqr djuk gksxk A ckjg lIrkg ls vf/kd dh xHkZorh efgyk vH;FkhZ izlo gksus rd] vLFkkbZ rkSj ij

vuqi;qDr cuh jgsxh A efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa dk fdlh izkf/kd`r fpfdRlk vf/kdkjh@O;olk;h }kjk mi;qDrrk

ds fy, iqu% ijh{k.k fd;k tk,xkA

¼N½ lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr dk ;fn vius inh; dŸkZO;ksasa ds lEcU/k esa nkSjs ij tkuk visf{kr gks]

rks og mlh nj ij] tSlh fu;fer izfrLFkkuh in/kkjh dks osrueku ds U;wure ij ykxw gS] ;k=k

HkÙks@nSfud HkÙks dk gdnkj gksxk@gksxh A

¼t½ fu;fer deZpkfj;ksa dh n”kk esa] ;Fkk ykxw lsok fu;eksa ds micU/k tSls ,Q0vkj0&,l0vkj0]

NqV~Vh fu;e] lk/kkj.k Hkfo’; fuf/k fu;e] iSU”ku fu;e rFkk vkpj.k fu;e vkfn lafonk ij fu;qDr

O;fDr;ksa dh n”kk esa ykxw ughsa gksaxs A os bl LrEHk esa ;Fkkof.kZr miyfC/k;ksa bR;kfn ds fy, gdnkj gksaxs A

6173

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

16- vkj{k.k-&&lsok esa fu;qfDr] fgekpy izns'k ljdkj }kjk le;≤ ij vuqlwfpr

tkfr;ksa@vuqlwfpr tu&tkfr;ksa@vU; fiNM+s oxks± vkSj vU; izoxZ ds O;fDr;ksa ds fy, lsok esa vkj{k.k dh

ckcr tkjh fd, x, vkns'kksa ds v/khu gksxhA

17- foHkkxh; ijh{kk-&&Ykkxw ugha A

18- f'kfFky djus dh 'kfDr-&&Tkgka jkT; ljdkj dh ;g jk; gks fd ,slk djuk vko';d ;k

lehphu gS] ogka og dkj.kksa dks fyf[kr esa vfHkfyf[kr djds vkSj fgekpy izns'k yksd lsok vk;ksx ds

ijke'kZ ls vkns'k }kjk] bu fu;eksa ds fdUgha micU/kksa dks fdlh oxZ ;k O;fDr;ksa ds izoxZ ;k inksa dh ckcr

f'kfFky dj ldsxhA

&&&&&&&&&

mikcU/k&Þ[kß

vuqla/kku lgk;d] oxZ&III ¼vjktif=r½ vfyfid oxhZ; lsok,a vkSj fgekpy izns'k ljdkj ds e/;

funs'kd] i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx fgekpy izns'k ds ek/;e ls fu"ikfnr dh tkus okyh

lafonk@djkj dk izk#i

;g djkj Jh@Jhefr ----------------------------------------------------------------- iq=@iq=h Jh ----------------------------------- fuoklh

------------------------------------------------] lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr~ ÞizFke i{kdkjß dgk x;k

gS½] vkSj fgekpy izns'k dh jkT;iky] ds e/;] funs'kd] i;kZoj.k] foKku ,oa izkS|ksfxdh foHkkx fgekpy

izns'k] ¼ftls blesa blds Ik'pkr~ Þf}rh; i{kdkjß dgk x;k gS½ ds ek/;e ls vkt rkjh[k --------------------------------

dks fd;k x;kA

Þf}rh; i{kdkjß us mijksDr ÞizFke i{kdkjß dks yxk;k gS vkSj izFke i{kdkj us vuqla/kku lgk;d]

oxZ&III ¼vjktif=r½ ds #i esa lafonk vk/kkj ij fuEufyf[kr fucU/ku vkSj 'krks± ij lsok djus ds fy,

lgefr nh gS%&&

1- ;g fd ÞizFke i{kdkjß vuqla/kku lgk;d ds #i esa -------------------------ls izkjEHk gksus vkSj ----------------

----------dks lekIr gksus okys fnu rd ,d o"kZ dh vof/k ds fy, Þf}rh; i{kdkjß dh lsok esa

jgsxkA ;g fofufnZ"V #i ls mfYyf[kr fd;k x;k gS vkSj nksukas i{kdkjksa }kjk djkj ik;k x;k

gS fd izFke i{kdkj dh f}rh; i{kdkj ds lkFk lafonk] vkf[kjh dk;Z fnol~ vFkkZr~ --------------------

fnu dks Lo;aeso gh i;Zoflr ¼lekIr½ le>h tk,xh vkSj lwpuk uksfVl vko';d ugha gksxk %

ijUrq lafonk dh vof/k esa o’kkZuqo’kZ vk/kkj ij [email protected] djus ds fy, lEc)

foHkkxk/;{k ;g izek.k&i= tkjh djsxk fd lafonk ij fu;qfDr O;fDr dh lsok rFkk vkpj.k]

ml o’kZ ds nkSjku larks’ktud jgk gS vkSj dsoy rHkh mldh lafonk dh vof/k

uohd`r@foLrkfjr dh tk,xh A

2- izFke i{kdkj dh lafonkRed jde 14100@&#i, izfrekl gksxh A

3- izFke i{kdkj dh lsok iw.kZr;k vLFkk;h vk/kkj ij gksxhA ;fn lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr dk

dk;[email protected] Bhd ugh Ikk;k tkrk gS ;k fu;fer in/kkjh ml fjfDr ds fo:)+ fu;qDr@

rSukr dj fn;k tkrk gS] ftlds fy, izFke i{kdkj dks lafonk ij yxk;k x;k gS] rks

fu;qfDr i;Zoflr ¼lekIr½ fd, tkus ds fy, nk;h gksxh A

4- lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr ,d ekl dh lsok iwjh djus ds Ik”pkr~ ,d fnu ds vkdfLed

vodk”k dk gdnkj gksxk A rFkkfi lafonk ij fu;qDr deZpkjh ckjg lIrkg ds izlwfr

6174

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

vodk”k vkSj nl fnu ds fpfdRlk vodk”k ds fy, Hkh gdnkj gksxk@gksxhA og fpfdRlk

izfriwfrZ vkSj ,y0Vh0lh0 bR;kfn ds fy, Hkh gdnkj ugha gksxk@gksxh A lafonk ij fu;qDr

O;fDr dks mijksDr ds flok; vU; fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vodk”k vuqKkr ugh gksxk %

ijUrq vuqiHkqDr vkdfLed vodk”k vkSj fpfdRldk vodk”k ,d dyS.Mj o’kZ rd lafpr

fd;k tk ldsxk vkSj vkxkeh dyS.Mj o’kZ ds fy, vxzuhr ugha fd;k tk,xk A

5- fu;U=d vf/kdkjh ds vuqeksnu ds fcuk lsok ls vuf/kd`r vuqifLFkfr ls Lor% gh lafonk dk

Ik;kZolku ¼lekiu½ gks tk,xk A lafonk ij fu;qDr vuqla/kku lgk;d] dŸkZO; ¼M~;wfV½ ls

vuqifLFkfr dh vof/k ds fy, lafonkRed jde dk gdnkj ugha gksxk A

6- lafonk ij fu;qDr in/kkjh ftlus rSukrh ds ,d LFkku ij rhu o’kZ dk dk;Zdky iw.kZ dj

fy;k gks] vko”;drk ds vk/kkj ij LFkkukUrj.k gsrq ik= gksxk] tgka Hkh iz”kklfud vk/kkj ij

,slk djuk vkisf{kr gks A

7- p;fur vH;FkhZ dks ljdkjh@jftLVhd`r fpfdRlk O;oLkk;h ls viuk vkjksX;rk izek.k&i=

izLrqr djuk gksxkA efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa dh n”kk esa ckjg lIrkg ls vf/kd dh xHkkZoLFkk] izlo

gksus rd mls vLFkkbZ rkSj ij vuqi;qDr cuk nsxh A efgyk vH;fFkZ;ksa dk izkf/kd`r fpfdRlk

vf/kdkjh@O;oLkk;h }kjk mi;qDrrk ds fy, iqu% ijh{k.k fd;k tkuk pkfg, A

8- lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr dk] ;fn vius inh; dRrZO;ksa ds lEcU/k esa] nkSjs ij tkuk visf[kr

gks] rks og mlh in ij] tSlh fu;fer izfrLFkkuh in/kkfj;ksa dks osrueku ds U;wure ij ykxw

gS] ;k=k HkRrs@nSfud HkRrs dk gdnkj gksxk@gksxh A

9- lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr ¼;ksa½ dks deZpkjh lkewfgd chek ;kstuk ds lkFk&lkFk

bZ0ih0,Q0@th0ih0,Q0 Hkh ykxw ugha gksxkA fu;fer deZpkfj;ksa dh n”kk esa] ;Fkk ykxw lsok

fu;eksa ds micU/k tSls ,Q0 vkj0&,l0 vkj0] NqV~Vh fu;e] lk/kkj.k Hkfo’; fuf/k fu;e]

iSU”ku fu;e rFkk vkpj.k vkfn lafonk ij fu;qDr O;fDr;ksa dh n”kk esa ykxw ugha gksaxs A os

bl LrHHk esa ;Fkkof.kZr miyfC/;ksa bR;kfn ds fy, gdnkj gksaxs A

blds lk{;Lo:i izFke i{kdkj vkSj f}rh; i{kdkj us lkf{k;ksa dh mifLFkfr esa blesa loZizFke

mfYyf[kr rkjh[k dks vius&vius gLrk{kj dj fn, gSa A

lkf{k;ksa dh mifLFkfr esa

1- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¼uke o iwjk irk½

2- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¼uke o iwjk irk½

¼izFke i{kdkj ds gLrk{kj½

lkf{k;ksa dh mifLFkfr esa

1- ----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

¼uke o iwjk irk½

6175

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

2- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¼uke o iwjk irk½

¼f}rh; i{kdkj ds gLrk{kj½

&&&&&&&&&

[Authority English Text of this Government Notification No. STE-B (2)-8/2010 dated as

required under clause (3) of Article 348 of the Constitution of India.]

ENVIRONMENT, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171002, the 21^th January, 2014

No. STE-B (2)-8/2010.—In exercise of the powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of

the Constitution of India, the Governor, Himachal Pradesh, in consultation with the Himachal

Pradesh Public Service Commission, is pleased to make the Recruitment and Promotion Rules for

the post of Research Assistant, Class-III, (Non-Gazetted) (Non-Ministerial Services) in the

Department of Environment, Science & Technology, Himachal Pradesh, as per Annexure-A

attached to this notification, namely:—

Short title and commencement.—(1) These rules may be called the Himachal

Pradesh, Department of Environment, Science & Technology, Research Assistant, (Class-III, Non-

Gazetted) Non-Ministerial Services Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2013.

(2) These rules shall come into force from the date of publication in the Rajpatra,

Himachal Pradesh.

By order,

Sd/-

Pr. Secretary (Env. S&T).

___________

“ANNEXURE-A”

RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION RULES FOR THE POST OF RESEARCH

ASSISTANT

(NON-GAZETTED)

CLASS–III,

THE

DEPARTMENT

ENVIRONMENT, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, HIMACHAL PRADESH

Name of Post.—Research Assistant

Number of Post(s).—02 (Two)

Classification.—Class-III (Non-Gazetted) (Non-Ministerial Services).

Scale of Pay.—(i) Pay scale for regular incumbents:

Pay Band ` 10300-34800 + ` 3800/- Grade Pay

6176

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

(ii) Emoluments for Contract Employees ` 14,100/- as per details given in Column

15-A.

Whether “Selection” post or “Non-selection” post.—Non applicable

Age for direct recruitment.—Between 18 and 45 years:

Provided that the upper age limit for direct recruits will not be applicable to the candidates

already in service of the Government including those who have been appointed on adhoc or on

contract basis :

Provided further that if a candidate appointed on adhoc basis or on contract basis had

become over-age on the date he/she was appointed as such he/she shall not be eligible for any

relaxation in the prescribed age-limit by virtue of his/her such adhoc or contract appointment :

Provided further that upper age-limit is relaxable for Scheduled castes/Scheduled

Tribes/Other categories of persons to the extent permissible under the general or special order (s) of

the Himachal Pradesh Government:

Provided further that the employees of all the Public Sector Corporations and Autonomous

Bodies who happened to be Government servants before absorption in Public Sector

Corporations/Autonomous Bodies at the time of initial of such constitutions of such Corporations/

Autonomous Bodies shall be allowed age concession in direct recruitment as admissible to

Government servants. This concession will not, however, be admissible to such staff of the Public

Sector Corporations/ Corporations /Autonomous Bodies and who are/were finally absorbed in the

service of such Corporations/ Autonomous bodies after initial constitution of the Public Sector

Corporations/Autonomous Bodies.

Notes:—

(1) Age limit for direct recruitment will be reckoned on the first day of the year in which

the post(s) is/are advertised for inviting application or notified to the Employment

Exchanges or as the case may be.

(2) Age & experience in the case of direct recruitment, relaxable at the discretion of the

Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission in case the candidate is otherwise well

qualified.

Minimum educational and other qualifications required for direct recruit(s).—(a)

Essential Qualifications(s).—M.Sc. in Environmental Science or B.E./B. Tech. Degree in

Environmental Science or Environmental Engineering from a recongned University or an Institute

duly recognized by the Central /H.P. Government.

(b) Desirable Qualification(s).—Knowledge of customs, manners & dialects of Himachal

Pradesh and suitability for appointment in the peculiar conditions prevailing in the Pradesh.

Whether age and educational qualification(s) prescribed for direct recruit(s) will

apply in the case of the promotee(s).—Age : Not applicable.

Educational Qualification(s):— Not applicable.

6177

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

Period of probation, if any.—Two years subject to such further extension for a period

not exceeding one year as may be ordered by the competent authority in special circumstances and

reasons to be recorded in writing.

10. Method(s) of recruitment, whether by direct recruitment or by promotion,

deputation, transfer and the percentage of post(s) to be filled in by various methods.—100%

on secondment basis failing which by direct recruitment on a ‘regular’ basis orby recruitment on

contract basis, as the case may be.

11. In case of recruitment by promotion, secondment, transfer, grades from which

promotion/ deputation, transfer is to be made.—On On secondment basis from amongst the

incumbent(s) of this post subject to possessing of a recognized M.Sc. Degree in Environmental

Science or B.E./B.Tech. Degree in Environmental Science or Environmental Engineering and

working in the identical pay scales from other Himachal Pradesh Government Department(s)/

Board(s)/Corporation(s)/Autonomous Body(s).

12. If a Departmental Promotion Committee exists, what is its composition?.—Not

applicable

13. Circumstances under which the H.P.P.S.C. is to be consulted in making

recruitment.—As required under the Law.

14. Essential requirement for a direct recruitment.—A candidate for appointment to

any service or post must be a citizen of India.

15. Selection for appointment to post by direct recruitment.—Selection for

appointment to the post in the case of direct recruitment shall be made on the basis of viva-voce

test; if the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission or other recruiting authority, as the case

may be, so consider necessary or expedient by a written test or practical test, the standard/syllabus

etc. of which will be determined by the Commission/other recruiting authority, as the case may be.

15-A Selection for appointment to the post by contract appointment.—

Notwithstanding anything contained in these Rules, contract appointments to the post will be made

subject to the terms and conditions given below:—

(I) CONCEPT.—(a) Under this policy the Research Assistant, in the Department of

Environment, Science & Technology, H.P. will be engaged on contract basis initially for one year;

which may be extendable on year to year basis:

Provided that the extension/renewable of contarct period on year to year basis the concerned

HOD shall issue a certificate that the service and conduct of the contract appointee is satisfactory

during the year and only than his period of contract is to be renewed/ extened.

(b) POST FALLS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF HP HPSSSB.—The Director,

Environment, Science & Technology department Himachal Pradesh after obtaining the approval of

the Government to fill up the posts on contract basis will place the requisition with the concerned

recruiting agency i.e. Himachal Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Board, Hamirpur.

(c) The selection will be made in accordance with the eligibility conditions prescribed in

these R&P Rules.

(II) CONTRACTUAL EMOLUMENTS.—The Research Assistant appointed on contract

basis will be paid consolidated fixed contractual amount @ ` 14,100/- P.M. (which shall be equal

6178

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

to minimum of the pay band + grade pay). An amount of ` 423/- (3% of the minimum of pay band+

grade pay of the post) as annual increase in contractual emoluments for the subsequent year(s) will

be allowed if contract is extended beyond one year.

(III) APPOINTING/ DISCIPLIANRY AUTHORITY.—The Director, Environment,

Science & Technology Department Himachal Pradesh will be appointing and disciplinary authority.

(IV) SELECTION PROCESS.—Selection for appointment to the post in the case of

Contract appointment will be made on the basis of viva-voce test or if considered necessary or

expedient by a written test or practical test the standard/syllabus etc. of which will be determined

by the concerned recruitment agency i.e. Himachal Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Board,

Hamirpur.

(V) COMMITTEE FOR SELECTION OF CONTRACTUAL APPOINTMENTS.—

As may be constituted by the concerned recruiting agency i.e. the Himachal Pradesh Subordinate

Services Selection Board, Himirpur from time to time.

(VI) AGREEMENT.—After selection of a candidate, he/ she shall sign an agreement as

per Annexure-B appended to these Rules.

(VII) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—(a) The contractual appointee will be paid fixed

contractual amount @ ` 14,100/- per month (which shall be equal to minimum of the pay band +

grade pay). The contract appointee will be entitled for increase in contractual amount @ ` 423/-

(3% of minimum of the pay band + grade pay of the post) for further extended years and no other

allied benefits such as senior/selection scales etc. will be given.

(b) The service of the Contract appointee will be purely on temporary basis. The

appointment is liable to be terminated in case the performance/ conduct of the contract appointee is

not found satisfactory.

service. However, the contract employees will also be entitled for 12 weeks MaternityLeave and 10

days Medical leave. He/She shall not be entitled for Medical Re-imbursement and LTC etc. No

leave of any other kind except above is admissible to the contract appointee:

Provided that the un-availed Caual Leave and Medical Leave can be accumulated upto the

Calendar Year and will not be carried forward for the next Calendar Year.

(d) Unauthorised absence from duty without the approval of the Controlling Officer shall

automatically lead to the termination of the contract. Contract appointee shall not be entitled for

contractual amount for the period of absence from duty.

(e) An official appointed on contract basis who have completed three years tenure at one

place of posting will be eligible for transfer on need based basis wherever required on

administrative grounds.

(f)

Selected candidate will have to submit a certificate of his/her fitness from a

Government/ Registered Medical Practitioner. Women candidate pregnant beyond 12 weeks will

stand temporarily unfit till the confinement is over. The women candidate will be re-examined for

the fitness from an authorised Medical Officer/Practitioner.

6179

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

(g) Contract appointee will be entitled to TA/DA if required to go on tour in connection

with his/her official duties at the same rate as applicable to regular counterpart official at the

minimum of pay scale.

(h) Provisions of Service Rule like FR SR, Leave Rules, GPF Rules, Pension Rules &

Conduct Rules etc. as are applicable in case of regular employees will not be applicable in case of

contract appointees. They will be entitled for emolumenmts etc. as detailed in this column.

16. Reservation.—The appointment to the service shall be subject to orders regarding

reservation in the service for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes/ Other Backward Classes/ other

categories of persons issued by the Himachal Pradesh Government from time to time.

17. Depatmental Examination.—Not applicable

18. Powers to relax.—Where the State Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or

expedient to do so, it may, by order for reasons to be recorded in writing and in consultation with

the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, relax any of the provision(s) of these Rules with

respect to any Class or Category of person(s) or post(s).

___________

ANNEXURE –B

FORM OF CONTRACT/AGREEMENT TO BE EXECUTED BETWEEN THE Research

Assistant (Non-Gazetted) AND THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

THROUGH THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT.

This agreement is made on this………..….day of….………….………in the year

…………………..between Sh./Smt……………..........……. S/o/D/o ………...………………. R/o

……………….……… contract appointee, (hereinafter called the FIRST PARTY) AND The

Governor, Himachal Pradesh through Director of Environment, Science & Technology

Department, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter “SECOND PARTY”).

Whereas the SECOND PARTY has engaged the aforesaid FIRST PARTY and the FIRST

PARTY has agreed to serve as a Section Officer on contract basis on the following terms and

conditions:—

That the FIRST PARTY shall remain in the service of the SECOND PARTY as a

Research Assistant for a period of one year commencing on day of

………………….and ending on the day of …………………It is specifically

mentioned and agreed upon by both the parties that the contract of the FIRST PARTY

with SECOND PARTY shall ipso-facto stand terminated on the last working day i.e.

on ………and information notice shall not be necessary:

Provided that for further extension/ renewal of contract period the HOD shall issue a

certificate that the service and conduct of the contract appointee was satisfactory

during the year and only than the period of contract is to be renewed/ extended.

2. The Contractual appointee will be paid fixed Contractual amount @ ` 14,100/- per

month (which shall be equal to minimum of pay band + grade pay). The contract

appointee will be entitled for increase in contractual amount @ ` 423/- ( 3% of the

6180

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

minimum of the pay band + grade pay of the post) for further extended years and no

other allied benefits such as senior/selection scales etc. will be given.

3. The service of FIRST PARTY will be purely on temporary basis. The appointment is

liable to be terminated in case the performance/ conduct of the contract appointee is

not found good or if a regular incumbent is appointed/posted against the vacancy for

which the FIRST PARTY was engaged on contract.

4. Contractual appontee will be entitled for one day casual leave after putting one month

service. However, the contract employee will also be entitled for 12 weeks Maternity

leave and 10 days Medical leave. He/she shall not be entitled for Medical Re-

imbursement and LTC etc. No leave of any other kind except above is admissible to

the contractual appointee:

Provided that un-availed Casual Leave and Medical Leave can be accumulated upto

the Calendar year and will not be carried forward for the next Calender Year.

Unauthorised absence from the duty without the approval of the Controlling Officer

shall automatically lead to the termination of the contract. A Contractual Research

Assistant will not be entitled for contractual amount for the period of absence from

duty.

6. An official appointed on contract basis who has completed three years tenure at one

place of posting will be eligible for transfer on need based basis wherever required on

administrative grounds.

Selected candidate will have to submit a certificate of his/her fitness from a

Government/Registered Medical Practitioner. In case of Women candidates pregnant

beyond twelve weeks will render her temporarily unfit till the confinement is over. The

women candidate shall be re-examined for fitness from an authorised Medical

Officer/Practitioner.

8. Contract appointee shall be entitled to TA/DA if required to go on tour in connection

with his/her official duties at the same rate as applicable to regular counter-part

officials at the minimum of pay scale.

9. The Employees Group Insurance Scheme as well as EPF/GPF will not be applicable to

contractual appointee(s).

IN WITNESS the FIRST PARTY AND SECOND PARTY have herein to set their hands

the day, month and year first, above written.

IN THE PRESENCE OF WITNESSES :

1. ------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

(Name and Full Address)

(Signature of the FIRST PARTY)

-------------------------------------------------

(Name and Full Address)

6181

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

IN THE PRESENCE OF WITNESSES :

----------------------------------------------

(Name and full address)

(Signature of the SECOND PARTY)

---------------------------------------------

(Name and Full Address)

__________

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-02, the 2^nd January, 2014

No. EDN-A-Ka(1)-2/2012.—In pursuance of the Judgment delivered by the Hon’ble High

Court in CWP No 1468 of 2013 alongwith others titled as Dhrub Dev Sharma & others versus State

of HP (De-notifying of 08 Govt. Colleges) on 18th June, 2013, the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is

pleased to notify the guidelines regarding opening of new educational institutions i.e. Government

Degree Colleges in the State to achieve the objectives of access, equity and quality in higher

Education with immediate effect as under :—

The distance of existing nearby college to proposed college shall not be usually less

then 25 KM. The distance condition can be relaxed depending upon the need of the

area/towns where the existing colleges are overcrowded and having the enrolment of

students more than 3000.

In thickly populated cities like Shimla, Mandi, Solan, Dharamshala, Una etc., where,

there is huge rush of students and it is becoming increasingly difficult to run all the

three streams in the presently available infrastructure, the matter to shift some streams

like Arts/Commerce, which don’t require laboratory/etc. to out side the cities for

quality education, instead of starting new college shall be considered.

For opening of new colleges, the availability of students in the feeder institutions also

need to be kept in view. If the feeder institutions have sufficient enrolment in 10+2

class i.e. 400 or more preferably in the schools within 10-12 KM radius, the matter for

opening of new college may be considered subject to meeting of other parameters and

keeping in view the geographical conditions of the area.

For establishment of new Govt. Degree Colleges, normally land measuring 35 bighas

is required. This requirement will be sufficient for providing Arts, Commerce, Science

Blocks and Administrative Block as well as residential / hostels. But, since only Arts

stream classes will be started in the begining, this condition could be relaxed, keeping

in view the local conditions. The total land requirement shall be earmarked as under:—

(a) 10 bighas for construction of Teaching Blocks (Administrative, Arts & Science

Blocks) as detailed above.

6182

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

(b) 10 bighas for play ground and Stadium etc. for sports and other open-air-co-

curricular activities.

(d) 5 bighas for the construction of residential accommodation for the staff.

(e) 5 bighas for further expansion as per future requirements.

For opening of new government colleges, adequate budget provision for non recurring

and recurring expenditure shall be made. Initially the Government will start only Arts

Stream in the first phase, thus, around rupees five crore in non-recurring and one crore

rupees for recurring expenditure shall be made available. Thereafter, while considering

the matter of starting of Commerce and Science stream, the additional budget will be

made available. These budget estimates are on the basis of the present prices and will

be suitable enhanced in due course of time. The new college may only be started after

ensuring availability of sufficient accommodation. The adequate budget provision for

Hostels as per requirement and staff quarters shall also be separately made available in

the following years.

In the beginning, new colleges will be started with English, History, Pol. Science,

Hindi, Sociology, Economics, Maths, Sanskrit, Computer Application and Physical

Education subjects. However, other subjects like Geography, Music, Pub.

Administration, Philosophy, Psychology, Painting, Dance, J & MC, could be

considered on demand basis from the students and keeping in view the availability of

faculty/infrastructure. The Commerce stream in the college will be started after

enrolment reaches around 400 students in all the three classes i.e. B.A.–I, II & III year,

whereas starting of the science stream would be considered after the total enrolment of

around 500 students. This will, however be subject to meeting of the other parameters

and keeping in view the availability of faculty / infrastructure.

7. It may not be possible to start all the subjects in all the colleges in the begining.

Therefore, it has been decided to start all the subjects, where the students enrolment in

Arts stream is more than 1000. However, the permission of starting of all the subjects

will be granted by the Government after considering the detailed proposal from the

Principal through Director of Higher Education, keeping in view the availability of

infrastructure etc.

8. The classes in new colleges shall be started when at least one post of Principal, one

post of Asstt. Professor in each subject, one librarian (College Cadre) and non-teaching

i.e. one Superintendent Gr-II, one Sr. Asstt., two Clerks, three peons and two

chowkidars are created and filled up to look after the Administrative, Academic &

other College developmental activities.

9. Preference shall be given to open at least one new college in every Revenue Sub

Division subject to the fulfillment of all other requirements/conditions as repeated above.

10. The provisions contained above may be considered for relaxation by the State Govt.,

keeping in view the unique geographical, social or demographic conditions in order to

improve access, equity and excellence in higher educations.

By order,

Sd/-

Pr. Secretary (Education).

6183

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-02, the 16^th January, 2014

No. EDN-A-Ka(4)-1/2002.—In supersesssion of this Department’s notification of even No.

dated 22nd February, 2010, the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to re-constitute the

Himachal Sanskrit Academy, in accordance with the section 6 of the constitution of Academy, as

under with immedicate effect :—

1. Hon’ble Chief Minister

. . Chairman

2. Hon’ble Education Minister /

. . Senior Vice- Chairman

Chief Parliament Secretary (Education)

3. Principal Secretary (Finance)

. . Member

4. Principal Secretary (Hr. Education)

. . Member

5. Director of Higher Education

. . Member

6. Director, Language, Art & Culture

. . Member

7. Professor A.N.D. Vajpai, Vice-Chancellor

. . Senior Sanskrit Scholar

HP University, Shimla-05

8. Prof. Kaushalya Chauhan, HOD, Sanskrit

. . Non-Official Member

HP University, Shimla-05

9. Prof. Virender Kumar Mishr, (Retd)

. . Non-Official Member

HP University, Shimla – 05

10. Acharya Bali Ram Shastri, (Retd)

. . Non-Official Member

Vill – Dhadhog, via Mashovra,

Distt – Shimla (HP)

11. Acharya Madan Mohan (Retd)

. . Non-Official Member

Narayan Nivas, Tuto, Shimla

12. Acharya Keshav Sharma (Retd)

. . Non-Official Member

Divya Deep, Tank Road, Solan (HP)

13. Principal Prem Lal Gautam (Retd)

. . Non-Official Member

Govt. Sanskrit College , Rabon, Solan

14. Dr. Manohar Lal Arya,

. . Non-Official Member

Pravan Kutir, Jyanti Vihar, Kangra

15. Principal Sudesh Gautam

. . Non-Official Member

Adrash Sanskrit College

Jangla, Distt. Shimla

16. Acharya Ramanand,

. . Non-Official Member

Anand Nivas, Nangal Devi,

Theog, Distt. Shimla

17. Prof. Keshav Sharma,

Non-Official Member

Sanskrit Research Institution

Mashobara, Distt. Shimla

18. Acharya Mast Ram Sharma, (Retd OSD)

Member Secretary

Acharya Niwas, Majyat,

Tuto, Shimla

By order,

Sd/-

Pr. Secretary (Education).

6184

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-02, the 09^th October, 2013

No. EDN-A-Ka(1)-8/2012.—The Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to order the

naming of Government College of Education, Dharamshala, District Kangra (H.P.) as Government

College of Teacher Education, Dharamshala District Kangra (H.P.) with immediate effect in

public interest.

By order,

Sd/-

Pr. Secretary (Education).

__________

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-02, the 19^th November, 2013

No. EDN-A-Ka(1)-8/2012.—The Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to order the

naming of Government College Haripur at Manali, District Kullu (H.P.) as Jawahar Lal Nehru

Government College Haripur at Manali District Kullu (H.P.) with immediate effect in public

interest.

By order,

Sd/-

Pr. Secretary (Education).

___________

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-02, the 15^th January, 2014

No. EDN-A-Ka(1)-1/2014.—The Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to order to open

the following new Government Degree College(s) with effect from 2014-15 i.e. from the session

June, 2014, in public interest :—

1. Government Degree College Nagrota Surian, Distt. Kangra (H.P).

2. Government Degree College Rewalsar, Distt. Mandi (H.P).

3. Government Degree College Lad Bharol, Distt. Mandi (H.P).

4. Government Degree College Sandhole, Distt. Mandi (H.P).

6185

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

5. Government Degree College Dharampur, Distt. Solan (H.P).

6. Government Degree College Diggal, Distt. Solan (H.P).

7. Government Degree College Sarahan, Distt. Sirmour (H.P).

8. Government Degree College Nankhari, Distt. Shimla (H.P).

Government Degree College Kumarsain Distt Shimla (H.P).

The Governor, Himachal Pradesh is further pleased to order the creation of following

teaching and non-teaching posts for the above mentioned each newly opened Government Degree

Colleges :—

Sr.

No.

Category/Name of Post(s)

Pay Band/Scale

No of Post(s)

(a)

Principal

Rs. 37400-67000+GP 10000

01 (One)

(b)

Assistant

Professor

for

subject

English, History, Hindi, Sociology,

Economics, Math and Sanskrit (one

post of each subject).

Rs. 15600-39100 + GP 6000

(For regular appointee)

Rs. 15600 + 6000 = 21600/-

PM (For contract appointee)

07 (Seven)

(c)

Librarian (College Cadre)

Rs. 15600-39100 + GP 6000

(For regular appointee)

Rs. 15600 + 6000 = 21600/-

PM (For contract appointee)

01 (One)

(d)

Superintendent Gr-II

Rs. 10300-34800+ GP- 4800

01 (One)

(e)

Senior Assistant

Rs. 10300-34800+ GP- 4400

01 (One)

(f)

Clerk

Rs. 5910+GP-1900 = 7810/- PM

(For Contract appointee)

Rs. 5910-20200+GP-1900

(For initial two years of regular

service)

Rs. 10300-34800 + GP- 3200

(Given after 2 years of regular

service)

02 (Two)

(g)

Peon

Rs. 4900+GP-1300 = 6200/-

PM (For Contract appointee)

Rs. 4900-10680+ GP- 1300

(For initial two years of regular

service)

Rs. 4900-10680+ GP- 1650

(Given after 2 years of regular

service)

03 (Three)

(h)

Chowkidar

-do-

02 (Two)

Total Posts

The expenditure will be incurred under Major Head 2202-03- 103-01-Soon-Non-Plan for

smooth functioning of these colleges.

This issues with prior concurrence of the Finance Department obtained vide their U.O. No

52755759-Fin-E/2013 dated 04th January, 2014.

By order,

Sd/-

Principal Secretary (Education).

6186

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-02, the 29^th May, 2013

No. EDN-A-Kha(6)-3/2009-Loose.—Smt. Gita Sarup Mehta, Lecturer in Economics

(College Cadre), Class-I (Gazetted) posted at Government College Sanjauli (Shimla), working in

the Higher Education Department has tendered a notice on 20-03-2013 for voluntary retirement due

to her personal medical and family circumstances.

The date of birth of the said officer is 09-12-1961. She joined Government service on 06

11-1989 and remained on Extra Ordinary Leave w.e.f. 03- 10-2003 to 27-03-2006, 01-10-2009 to

31-07-2011 and 01-08-2011 to 27-05-2013.

Therefore, keeping in view the circumstances mentioned in the notice the Governor,

Himachal Pradesh is pleased to accept the pre-mature retirement of said Smt. Gita Sarup Mehta,

Lecturer in Economics (College Cadre), Class-I (Gazetted), posted at Government College,

Sanjauli (Shimla) by invoking the provisions laid down under Sub-Rule (2B) of Rule-3 of the H.P.

Civil Services (Premature retirement) Rules, 1976 w.e.f. 28th May, 2013 (A.N.) subject to the

condition that all the outstanding amount recoverable from her will be deducted from the dues

payable to her, if any.

By order,

Sd/-

Secretary (Education).

__________

LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-2, 1^st January, 2014

No: Sharm (A) 7-1/2005 (Awards) L-D/Shala.—In exercise of the powers vested under

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

order the publication of awards of the following cases announced by the Presiding Officer, Labour

Court D/Shala on the website of the Department of Labour & Employment of the Government of

Himachal Pradesh.

Sr. No. Case No.

Title of the Case

Date of Award

156/2013

S/Shri Padma Dolkar V/s E.E. I&PH, Kaza.

01-10-2013

222/2012

Arivind Kumar V/s Director Kayakalp Palampur.

-do-

363/2012

Naresh Kumar V/S E.E. I&PH Dharamshala.

-do-

220/2012

Bam Dev V/S Director Kayakalp Palampur.

-do-

218/2012

Pritam Chand V/s

-do-

364/2012

Ram Kumar V/s Cozy Tech Ply Form.

-do-

308/2012

Ramesh Chand V/s E.E.HPPWD. Baijnath.

-do-

309/2012

Chuni Lal V/s

-do-

266/2012

Raj Kumar V/s E.E.HPPWD, Ghumarwin.

-do-

10.

265/2012

Prem Lal V/s

-do-

6187

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

11.

367/2012

Rakesh Kumar V/s E.E.HPPWD, Joginder

Nagar.

-do-

12.

346/2012

Gandhi Ram V/s

-do-

13.

342/2012

Madan Lal V/s

-do-

14.

333/2012

Kanta Devi V/s

-do-

15.

316/2012

Mangli Devi V/s

-do-

16.

35/2013

Praveen Kumar V/s International Car&Motors.

03-10-2013

17.

127/2011

Balbir Singjh V/s Conservater Swan River.

-do-

18.

312/2012

Rajeev Kumar V/s HPSEB, Bilaspur

14-10-2013

19.

63/2013

Lekh Ram V/s E.E. HPSEB Joginder Nagar.

15-10-2013

20.

294/2012

Dila Ram V/S E.E. HPPWD Dharampur.

-do-

21.

359/2012

Naresh Kumar V/s

-do-

22.

357/2012

Bir Singh V/s

-do-

23.

130/2011

Gurmail Singh V/s M/s Nispo Polyfabric.

-do-

24.

2812012

Jagdish Chand V/s E.E$. HPSEB Joginder Nagar.

-do-

25.

133/2011

Rajesh Kumar V/s D.F.O. Shamkshi.

-do-

26.

80/2011

Pradhan HRTC V/s R.M. HRTC, Dehra.

22-10-2013

27.

44/2011

Secy. H.P. Parivahan V/s R.M. Pathankot.

-do-

28.

297/2012

Ambika Singh V/s State of H.P.

-do-

29.

01/2013

Suresh Kumar V/s President Truck Opt. Society.

26-10-2013

30.

289/2012

Mangal Nath Sharma V/s M.D. H.P. Agri. Mkt.

Board.

-do-

31.

495/2009

Moti Ram V/s E.E. HPPWD Killer.

28-10-2013

32.

16/2013

Bego Devi V/s

-do-

33.

17/2013

Ajit Paul Singh V/s M/s Fultron India.

31-10-2013

By order,

R. D. DHIMAN,

Pr. Secretary (Labour & Employment).

___________

IN THE COURT OF RAJAN GUPTA, PRESIDING JUDGE, LABOUR COURT-CUM-

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, DHARAMSHALA, H.P.

Ref No.

: 222/2012

Date of Institution

: 17.4.2012

Date of Decision

: 01.10.2013

Shri Arvind Kumar s/o Late Shri Jagdish Chand, r/o Village and P.O. Arth, Tehsil

Palampur, District Kangra, H.P.

..Petitioner.

Versus

The Director, KAYAKALP Vivekanand Medical Research Trust, Palampur, District

Kangra, H.P.

..Respondent.

Reference under Section 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

For the Petitioner

: 0Sh. N.L. Kaundal, AR

6188

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

: Sh. Vijay Kaundal, Adv.

For the Respondent : Sh. S.K. Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

The below given reference has been received from the appropriate Government for

adjudication:

“Whether the termination of services of Shri Arvind Kumar S/O Late Shri Jagdish Chand,

Village and P.O. Arth, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. by the Director,

KAYAKALP Vivekanand Medical Research Trust, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. w.e.f.

31-07-2010 without complying with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is

legal and justified? If not, to what amount of back wages, past service benefits, seniority

and compensation the above worker is entitled to from the above employer?”

The case of the petitioner (as set out in the statement of claim/demand) is that his

services were engaged by the respondent as a Plumber w.e.f. 28.12.2006. He was drawing

Rs.3,500/- per month as salary. He continuously worked as such up-to 31.7.2010 as well as

completed 240 days of work in each and every calendar year of his employment. During the service

tenure, his work and conduct was satisfactory. No complaint was received against him by the

management/trust/respondent. Even his explanation was not called for the misconduct, if any. To

his utter surprise, a letter dated 31.7.2010 was received by him. As per the said letter, his services

were terminated from 31.7.2010 itself. Before the termination of his services, neither any show

cause notice was given to him nor he was charge-sheeted for the misconduct, if any. No inquiry

was conducted against him. One month pay in lieu of the notice period and the retrenchment

compensation were not paid to him by the respondent at the time of the disengagement of his

services. The seniority list of security guards was not supplied to him by the respondent when his

services were dispensed with. The persons junior to him were retained in service by the respondent.

The latter failed to abide by the principle of ‘last come first go’. Not only this, after the termination

of his services, the respondent/management appointed new/fresh hands through Jai Prakash

Associates Pvt. Ltd. He was not given an opportunity of re-employment. The employees of the

respondent/trust had formed a workers’ union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. He (petitioner)

was a member of the said union. Due to the trade union activities, his services were disengaged by

the respondent alongwith the President and three members of the union. The same amounts to

unfair labour practice. From the date of his disengagement, he is unemployed. He is/was the only

earning member in the family. After the termination of his services, he approached the respondent

time and again for reemployment, but in vain. Demand notice dated 10.2.2011 served upon the

respondent by him did not have the desired effect. The act and conduct of the respondent is illegal

and unjustified. It is also violative of the provisions of Sections 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947, ‘the Act’ for short).

As such, as is evident from the prayer clause of the petition/statement of claim, the

petitioner has claimed the following relief(s) in this case:-

“i) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be set aside the illegal termination order dated

31.07.2010 and directed to respondent to reinstate the services of applicant with full back

wages, in continuity of service, seniority with all other consequential service benefits.

ii) Any other relief the Hon’ble Court deems fit may kindly be granted in the favour of

applicant and against the respondent”.

6189

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

On notice, the respondent appeared. He filed detailed reply controverting the

averments made in the petition/statement of claim. Preliminary objections have been taken to the

effect that the claim petition is not maintainable since the appointment of the petitioner was purely

temporary and contractual in nature. The institution is a charitable trust. It is not covered by the

provisions of the Act. The claim petition is misconceived. The petitioner has intentionally

suppressed the true and correct facts from the Court because of which he is not entitled to any

relief.

On merits, it has not been specifically denied that the services of the petitioner were

engaged as a Plumber w.e.f. 28.12.2006. However, it has been pleaded that the appointment of the

petitioner was purely contractual. The services of the petitioner were engaged from time to time on

contract basis by issuing the appointment letters in his name. In the letters of appointment, it has

been clearly mentioned that the services of the petitioner can be dispensed with during the contract

period if the circumstances so warrant and after the contract period is over. The claimant/petitioner

was appointed for one year on contract basis vide letter dated 04.7.2009. The management took a

decision to reduce the staff strength in different branches. For the said reason, the services of the

petitioner were disengaged w.e.f. 31.7.2010. No person junior to the petitioner has been retained in

service. Even no new/fresh hands have been appointed. The services of the petitioner were engaged

as a Plumber on contract basis. There is/was no need to supply the seniority list of the security

guards to him. The services of the petitioner and others have not been disengaged on account of the

trade union activities as claimed. It has been owned that a demand notice was issued by the

petitioner and conciliation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner is gainfully employed. No

provision of the Act has been infringed. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief. The petition is

meritless.

In these circumstances, the respondent prays that the petition in hand be dismissed.

In the rejoinder, the petitioner has reiterated the contents of the petition/statement of

claim and refuted the objections put forth by the respondent. It has been maintained that the work

for which he was employed is of a permanent nature. Contractual appointment was given to him

only with a view to throw him out of the job without any notice and paying the retrenchment

compensation.

Per order dated 16.8.2012, following issues were struck:

Whether the termination of the services of the petitioner by the respondent w.e.f.

31.7.2010 is illegal and unjustified as alleged?

..OPP.

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

Whether the petitioner has concealed the true and material facts from the Court as

alleged. If so, its effect? ..OPR.

Relief.

I have heard the ld. counsel/AR for the parties and have gone through the case file.

For the reasons detailed here under, my findings on the above issues are as follows:-

Issue No. 1

: No

Issue No. 2

: Yes

6190

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

Issue No. 3

: Yes

Relief.

: Claim petition dismissed vide operative portion of the Award.

REASONS FOR FINDINGS

ISSUE NO. 1

Shri Arvind Kumar (petitioner) stepped into the witness box as PW1. In his affidavit

Ex. PW1/A submitted under Order 18 Rule 4 CPC, he reiterated on oath the contents of the

petition/statement of claim in its entirety.

In the cross-examination, he stated that he had gone through the contents of the appointment

letter dated 05.1.2010, the copy of which is Ex. RB. He joined the service only after admitting the

terms and conditions of the appointment to be correct. He admitted that earlier also, his services

used to be engaged by the respondent on contract basis for a specific period from time to time.

Letter dated 31.7.2010 (Ex. RA) was received by him from the respondent. He admitted that only

he and Shri Dinesh Kumar were working as plumbers with the respondent. He also admitted that

Shri Dinesh Kumar was appointed earlier to him and the workers’ union came into existence on

16.11.2010. He even admitted that the management had decided to terminate the services of the

temporary staff due to the non availability of the budget. He denied that he has instituted a phoney

petition at the behest of Shri Chandan Sood, Pradhan of the workers’ union, to gain the

employment in an unlawful manner.

Conversely, Shri Sudershan Sharma, Director KAYAKALP, V.M.R.T., Palampur

(respondent) testified as RW1. In his affidavit Ex. RW1/A preferred as per Order 18 Rule 4 CPC,

he corroborated on oath the contents of the reply filed by him.

In the cross-examination, he admitted that when the services of the petitioner were

disengaged, neither one month notice was given to him nor the retrenchment compensation was

paid. He denied that the petitioner was not a contractual employee and his services have been

terminated in a wrongful manner.

10.

Exts. RW1/B to E are the copies of the appointment letters which were issued by the

respondent/trust in the name of the petitioner. They unfold that the services of the petitioner used to

be engaged purely on contractual basis for a fixed period.

11.

It is an admitted fact that the services of the petitioner were engaged as an Assistant

Plumber by the respondent. The latter has not denied the fact that the petitioner was initially

employed on 28.12.2006 and he worked up-to 31.7.2010. Admittedly, the services of the petitioner

were disengaged by the respondent w.e.f. 31.7.2010 (afternoon) per letter of even date, the copy of

which is Ex. RA. The petitioner (PW1) in his cross-examination admitted that the

respondent/management had taken a decision to remove from service the temporary staff due to the

non availability of the budget. In Ex. RA also, it has been mentioned that upon reviewal of staff

strength in different branches of Kayakalap and the decision taken for effecting reduction, the

services of the petitioner are no longer required and are terminated.

12.

Ex. RB is the copy of the last appointment letter dated 5th January, 2010, which was

issued in favour of the petitioner by the respondent. It depicts that the services of the petitioner

were engaged on payment of fixed salary of Rs.3,500/- per month purely on contract basis initially

for a period of one year from the date of his joining. In Ex. RB, it has been highlighted that the

contractual appointment is purely temporary. The petitioner shall not be entitled to the regular

6191

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

appointment or continuation of the contractual appointment beyond the period of appointment. It

has also been stipulated that if the circumstances so warrant the contractual appointment can be

terminated at any time during the contract period. By taking recourse to this subsequent

condition/clause of the appointment letter, the services of the petitioner have been disengaged by

the respondent on 31.7.2010 during the currency of the contract period, which as per the

appointment letter Ex. RB, was to come to an end on 04.1.2011.

13.

Copy of the service rules framed by the respondent relating to the plumbers is there

on the file. They show that if the circumstances so warrant, the contractual appointment can be

terminated at any time during the contract period. The admissions made by the petitioner (PW1)

make it clear that the respondent/management had decided to terminate the services of the

temporary staff due to the financial constraints. The assertion of the petitioner that his services were

disengaged on account of the union activities seems to be totally false and baseless as it has come

in evidence that the workers’ union was formed on 16.11.2010, whereas the services of the

petitioner were dispensed with on 31.7.2010.

14.

The story put forth by the petitioner that his services were disengaged during the

contract period as a measure of punishment by the respondent is untrue. Section 2(oo) of the Act

reads thus:-

“[(oo) “retrenchment” means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman

for any reason whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary

action, but does not include-

(a)

voluntary retirement of the workman; or

(b)

retirement of the workman on reaching the age of superannuation if the contract of

employment between the employer and the workman concerned contains a

stipulation in that behalf; or

[(bb) termination of the service of the workman as a result of the non-renewal of the

contract of employment between the employer and the workman concerned on its expiry or

of such contract being terminated under a stipulation in that behalf contained therein; or

(c)

termination of the service of a workman on the ground of continued ill-health;]”

15.

As already mentioned, the services of the petitioner were disengaged by the

respondent during the contract period under a stipulation in that behalf contained in the

appointment letter dated 05.1.2010 (Ex. RB). The same does not come within the mischief of the

word ‘retrenchment’ as defined in the Act.

16.

Otherwise too, the petitioner (PW1) admitted that only he and Shri Dinesh Kumar

were working as plumbers with the respondent. Shri Dinesh Kumar was appointed earlier to him.

This indicates that the petitioner was the junior between the two plumbers appointed by the

respondent. He (petitioner) has failed to disclose the name of any person junior to him who was

retained in service by the respondent at the time of his disengagement. Not only this, the petitioner

has not divulged the name of any person, who was employed by the respondent after the

termination of his services.

17.

Such being the situation, I have no hesitation to conclude that the respondent has not

flouted the provisions of Sections 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Act. The termination of the services

of the petitioner by the respondent cannot be termed as ‘retrenchment’ particularly when the terms

6192

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

and conditions of engagement were to the knowledge of the petitioner as well as he joined the

service after admitting the same to be correct.

18.

It appears to me that the avarice of the petitioner to grab the job and money has

forced him to file a totally false and baseless claim. He is not entitled to any relief.

19.

This issue is decided against the petitioner and in favour of his opponent.

ISSUE NO. 2

20.

Keeping in mind my findings on issue No.1 above, it is held that the claim petition is

not maintainable in the present form.

21.

Moreover, the terms and conditions relating to the engagement of the petitioner as

contained in the appointment letters make it abundantly clear that the period of contractual

appointment can be further extended at the mutual discretion of both the parties. At the cost of

reiteration, I will like to add that the term of contractual appointment of the petitioner as per the

appointment letter dated 05.1.2010 (Ex. RB) was for a period of one year from the date of the

joining of the petitioner. Thus, the term of contractual appointment of the petitioner/claimant came

to an end on 04.1.2011. On the expiry of the period of the contractual appointment, there cannot be

an automatic extension of the period of the engagement of the services of the petitioner. As already

mentioned, the term of contractual appointment can be further extended at the mutual discretion of

both the parties only. In view of these facts, the petitioner has no right to continue in service after

04.1.2011 and the respondent cannot be directed to reinstate his services.

22.

This issue is also decided against the petitioner.

ISSUE NO. 3

23.

Taking into consideration my findings on issue No.1, it is held that the petitioner has

concealed the true and material facts from the Court. For the said reason also, he is required to be

shown the doors of the Court.

24.

This issue too is decided against the petitioner and in favour of his adversary.

RELIEF (ISSUE NO. 4)

25.

As a sequel to my findings on the issues No. 1 to 3, the instant claim petition being

meritless, not maintainable and malafide fails. It is, therefore, dismissed with costs quantified as

Rs.3,000/- (Three thousand only).

26.

The reference is answered in the aforesaid terms.

27.

A copy of this Award be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the

official gazette.

28.

File after due completion be consigned to the Record Room.

Announced in the open Court today this 1st day of October, 2013.

RAJAN GUPTA,

Presiding Judge,

Labour Court-cum-Industrial

Tribunal, Dharamshala, H.P.

6193

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

IN THE COURT OF RAJAN GUPTA, PRESIDING JUDGE, LABOUR COURT-CUM-

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, DHARAMSHALA, H.P.

Ref: No.

: 363/2012

Date of Institution

: 05-11-2012

Date of Decision

: 01-10-2013

Sh. Naresh Kumar s/o Sh. Bhajan Ram, r/o Village and P.O. Pasu, Tehsil Dharamshala,

Distt. Kangra, H.P.

..Petitioner.

Versus

The Executive Engineer, I & PH Division, Dharamshala, Distt. Kangra, H.P.

..Respondent.

Reference under Section 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

For the Petitioner

: Sh. Pradeep Dogra, Adv.

For the Respondent. : Sh. Sanjeev Katoch, Dy.D.A.

AWARD

The below given reference has been received from the appropriate Government for

adjudication:

“Whether termination of the services of Sh. Naresh Kumar s/o Sh. Bhajan Ram, VPO Pasu,

Tehsil Dharamshala, Distt. Kangra, (H.P.) by the Executive Engineer, IPH Division,

Dharamshala, Distt. Kangra w.e.f. 25.4.2000, without following the provision of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, what amount of back wages,

seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above Ex-Worker is entitled to from

the above employer?”

The case of the petitioner (as set out in the statement of claim/demand) is that his

services were engaged as a daily waged beldar by the respondent in the month of May, 1996.

During the service tenure, his work and conduct was up-to the mark. No complaint was received

against him by the respondent/department. On 25-04-2000, his services were terminated by the

respondent without any justification with intent to victimize him. He had completed more than 240

days of work in each and every calendar year of his engagement. Similarly situated workmen and

the persons junior to him (petitioner) were retained in service by the respondent at the time of his

termination. The respondent failed to abide by the principle of ‘last come first go’. After his

retrenchment, new/fresh hands have also been engaged by the respondent. No permission under

Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947, ‘the Act’ for short) was obtained

from the Government by the respondent before the disengagement of his (petitioner’s) services.

Earlier also, in the month of May, 1999, his (petitioner’s) services were terminated by the

respondent along-with the other workmen without any rhyme and reason. He and the other

workmen instituted an Original Application bearing O.A(D)No.192/1999 titled as Ravi Kumar &

others –vs-State of H.P. before the erstwhile Hon’ble H.P. Administrative Tribunal. Such Original

Application was decided in favour of the workmen/labourers by the Hon’ble Administrative

Tribunal on 24-04-1999. The respondent was directed to reengage the services of the workmen

6194

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

including him (petitioner). A direction was also issued by the Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal to

the respondent not to give fictional breaks in service to the petitioners / workmen. Pursuant to the

order dated 24-04-1999 passed by the Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal, the services of all the daily

wagers including him(petitioner) were reengaged by the respondent. They were provided the same

status. Muster rolls were also issued in their names by the respondent. After the expiry of a few

months, the respondent again terminated his(petitioner’s) services along-with the other labourers

with a malafide intention on 25-04-2000. The workmen, who had preferred an Original Application

(D)No.192/1999, were once again removed from service by the respondent. Thereafter, he

(petitioner) and others instituted Original Application No. 280/2000 before the Hon’ble

Administrative Tribunal against the respondent for committing contempt of the Court and for

reengagement. The said Original Application was dismissed by the Hon’ble Administrative

Tribunal for want of jurisdiction. Liberty was given to him (petitioner) and the other workmen to

approach the competent Court/forum for the redressal of their grievances. One Sh. Ravinder Kumar

had joined the service along with him (petitioner). He was allowed to work continuously by the

respondent. The services of Sh. Ravinder Kumar have also been regularized by the

respondent/department. All the workmen, who had instituted the above numbered Original

Application, have been reengaged by the respondent except him (petitioner) and Sh. Raj Kumar.

The names of the workmen who have been re-employed are S/Sh. Ravi Kumar, Suresh Kumar,

Uttam Chand and Brahm Dass. From the date of his unlawful termination, he(petitioner) is

unemployed. During the break period also, he was not gainfully employed. The act and conduct of

the respondent is illegal and unjustified. It is also violative of the provisions of Sections 25-F, 25-

G, 25-H and 25-N of the Act.

As such, as is apparent from the prayer clause of the petition/statement of claim, the

petitioner has claimed the following relief(s) in this case:-

“the respdt may please be directed to re-engage the applicant during the pendency of the

case and he may please be re-instated in service with all consequential benefits by setting

aside verbal as well as written order, if any, and the respdt may also be directed to pay

compensation for failure to comply with the various provisions of law, in the interest of

natural justice and fair play. It is further prayed that any other relief may also be passed to

the applicant and against the respdt which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit, in the

interest of justice.”

On notice, the respondent appeared. He filed detailed reply controverting the

averments made in the petition/statement of claim. Preliminary objections have been taken to the

effect that the claim petition is not maintainable since no legal or fundamental right of the petitioner

has been infringed. The petitioner has no cause of action. He has misrepresented himself and has

approached the Court by concealing the material facts. The claim petition is bad on account of

delay and laches on the part of the petitioner. He is estopped from filing the claim petition by his

act and conduct.

On merits, it has been denied that the services of the petitioner were engaged as a daily

waged beldar. However, it has been pleaded that the petitioner and the other similarly situated

workmen (total numbering 6) were engaged initially for 89 days in the month of May, 1996, as

seasonal labourers for undertaking the additional work. The period of engagement of the petitioner

and his companions was extended from time to time as per the availability of works and funds. The

services of all the 6 seasonal /additional workmen were regulated by maintaining a separate

workers were duly apprised about their service conditions at the time of the appointment. The

petitioner and others continued working under him(respondent) without any protest. In March,

2000, due to the paucity of the funds and work, it became difficult to continue the services of all the

6195

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

seasonal workers. Thus, one month notice dated 25-03-2000 under Section 25-F of the Act was

issued to all the seasonal labourers since some of them had completed 240 days of continuous

service in a block of 12 calendar months preceding the date of their disengagement i.e. 25-04-2000.

In case of the petitioner, no notice under Section 25-F of the Act was required to be served as he

did not complete 240 days of continuous service. The services of the petitioner and other similarly

situated workmen were retrenched in accordance with law. No person junior to the petitioner

pertaining to the same category was retained in service at the time of the disengagement of the

services of the petitioner. All the seasonal workers were retrenched along with the petitioner. It

stands admitted that Original Application No. (D) 192/1999 and O.A.No.280/2000 were preferred

before the Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal. The order dated 24-09-1999 pronounced by the

Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal was implemented in letter and spirit. Original Application No.(D)

280/2000 was dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioner cannot claim parity with Sh. Ravinder

Kumar who is/was not a seasonal worker. Moreover, Sh. Ravinder Kumar was engaged in the

month of February, 1996 in I & P.H. Division, Thural. He (Sh. Ravinder Kumar) joined his

(respondent’s) office in the month of October, 1997. S/Sh. Ravi Kumar, Suresh Kumar and Brahm

Dass were the seasonal workers like the petitioner. Their services were also retrenched along with

the petitioner. Sh. Ravi Kumar etc. have been reengaged as per the Awards passed by this Court.

S/Sh. Raj Kumar and Uttam Chand, who too were the seasonal labourers, are no longer in service

in his (respondent’s) office. The petitioner is gainfully employed as an agriculturist. The instant

industrial dispute has been raised by him at a belated stage. The dispute has become stale and faded

away. The petition is meritless.

In these circumstances, the respondent prays that the petition in hand be dismissed.

No rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner.

Per order dated 11-03-2013, following issues were struck :

Whether the termination of the services of the petitioner by the respondent w.e.f. 25-

04-2000 is illegal and unjustified as alleged?

..OPP..

Whether the petitioner has a cause of action?

..OPP.

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

Whether the petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands as alleged. If

so, its effect?

..OPR.

Whether the claim petition is hit by the vice of delay and laches as alleged. If so, its

effect?

..OPR.

Whether the petitioner is estopped from filing the claim petition by his act and

conduct as alleged. If so, its effect?

..OPR.

Relief.

I have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.

For the reasons detailed here under, my findings on the above issues are as follows:-

Issue No. 1

: Yes

Issue No. 2

: Yes

6196

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

Issue No. 3

: Not pressed

Issue No. 4

: Not pressed

Issue No. 5

: No

Issue No. 6

: Not pressed

Relief

: Claim petition allowed in part vide operative portion of the Award.

REASONS FOR FINDINGS

ISSUE NO. 1

Sh. Naresh Kumar (petitioner) stepped into the witness box as PW1. In his affidavit

Ex. PW1/A submitted under Order 18 Rule 4 CPC, he reiterated on oath the contents of the

petition/statement of claim in its entirety.

In the cross-examination, he admitted that 06 labourers (including him) had instituted the

Original Applications before the Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal as their service conditions were

the same. He denied that his services were engaged for carrying out the seasonal works. He

admitted that he was the junior most amongst the 6 workers. He denied that Sh. Ravinder Kumar

was transferred to the office of the respondent from Thural Division and is senior to him. He also

denied that to gain the employment in a wrongful manner, he has instituted a phoney petition.

Conversely, Sh. Deepak Garg, Executive Engineer, I & PH Division, Dharamshala

(respondent) testified as RW1. In his affidavit Ex. RW1/A preferred as per Order 18 Rule 4 CPC,

he corroborated on oath the contents of the reply filed by him.

In the cross-examination, he admitted that Sh. Ravi Kant etc. (6 labourers) were working

together. The services of S/Sh. Suresh Kumar, Ravi Kant and Brahm Dass has been reengaged as

per the Orders of the Court. He admitted that when the services of the petitioner were engaged, it

was not given in writing to him that he has been employed for undertaking the seasonal work(s)

only. He denied that the services of the petitioner have been disengaged unlawfully.

10.

Ex.PW1/B is the copy of the Judgment dated July 10, 2012 rendered by the Hon’ble

High Court of Himachal Pradesh in CWP No. 2118/ 2009 titled as Naresh Kumar –vs- State of

Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Labour & Employment) and others. It unfolds that the

appropriate Government was directed to make a reference to the Labour Court regarding the

industrial dispute going on between the parties.

11.

Exts. PW1/C and PW1/D are the copies of the Awards dated 28-09- 2011

pronounced by my ld. Predecessor in Reference No. 22/2008 titled as Sh. Suresh Kumar -vs- The

Executive Engineer, I&PH Division, Dharamshala and reference No. 23/2008 titled as Sh. Ravi

Kant –vs- The Executive Engineer, I & PH Division, Dharamshala.

12.

Ex. R-1 is the copy of the termination notice dated 25-03-2000 which was served

upon the petitioner and his co-workers by the respondent. It depicts that the services of the

petitioner and 5 others were retrenched w.e.f. 25-04-2000 (forenoon).

13.

Ex. R-2 is the copy of the register relating to the seasonal workers allegedly

maintained by the respondent.

6197

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

14.

Ex. RW1/B is the copy of the mandays chart pertaining to the petitioner.

15.

Ex. RW1/C is the copy of the Order /Judgment delivered on 24-09-1999 by the

Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal in O.A.(D) No.192/1999 titled as Sh. Ravi Kant and others -vs-

State of H.P. through Secretary I&P.H., Shimla and others.

16.

Ex. RW1/D is the copy of the Order dated October 28, 2005 passed by the Hon’ble

H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.(D)No.280/2000 titled as Ravi Kant and 2 others -vs- State of

H.P. through Secretary Irrigation & Public Health, Shimla and others. It reveals that the Original

Application instituted by the petitioner and others was dismissed as withdrawn.

17.

Exts. RW1/E and RW1/F are the mandays charts/seniority list with respect to Sh.

Ravinder Kumar s/o Sh. Moti Ram.

18.

Section 10(4) of the Act mandates that the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal shall

confine its adjudication to the points of dispute referred to it by the appropriate Government and the

matters incidental thereto. No reference has been received from the appropriate Government

regarding providing the breaks in service to the petitioner by the respondent. Therefore, the said

controversy, if any, between the parties cannot be looked into by this Court being beyond the terms

of the reference.

19.

It is the admitted case of the parties that the services of the petitioner were engaged

by the respondent in the month of May, 1996. The said fact finds support from the mandays chart

Ex. RW1/B which is not in dispute. The respondent has not placed/exhibited on the file any

document evidencing that the services of the petitioner and his associates namely S/Sh. Ravi Kant,

Suresh Kumar, Uttam Chand, Braham Dass and Raj Kumar were engaged for carrying out the

seasonal works only. In the industrial disputes raised by S/Sh. Suresh Kumar and Ravi Kant, the

respondent did not take the plea that they and their companions were appointed for undertaking the

seasonal works only. For these reasons, the assertion of the respondent that the petitioner and Sh.

Ravi Kant etc. were engaged for carrying out the seasonal activities seems to be totally false and

baseless.

20.

The mandays chart Ex. RW1/B unfolds that the petitioner worked with the

respondent/department intermittently from 07-05-1996 to 24-04-2000. Admittedly, his services

were disengaged by the respondent along with 5 other workmen w.e.f. 25-04-2000 (forenoon) after

issuing the notice dated 25-03-2000, the copy of which is Ex. R1. The mandays chart Ex. RW1/B

goes to show that the petitioner did not complete 240 days of work in a block of 12 calendar

months preceding the date of his termination. The provisions of Section 25-F of the Act are thus not

attracted in this case.

21.

The respondent has placed on the file the latest seniority list of the daily waged

workers working under him. Its perusal discloses that after the disengagement of the services of the

petitioner, many new /fresh hands were engaged by the respondent. There is nothing on the record

to establish that at the time of engaging new / fresh hands, an opportunity of re-employment was

afforded to the petitioner by the respondent. That being so, it can be safely said that the respondent

has contravened the provisions of Section 25-H of the Act. The termination of the services of the

petitioner by the respondent is illegal and unjustified. Needless to say that for deriving the benefit

under Section 25-H of the Act, a workman need not complete 240 days of work in a block of 12

calendar months anterior to the date of his termination.

22.

Otherwise too, it is an admitted fact that the services of the similarly situated

workmen namely S/Sh. Suresh Kumar, Ravi Kant and Braham Dass have already been reengaged

6198

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

by the respondent. To avoid discrimination, the petitioner is also entitled to the relief(s) granted to

his companions.

23.

This issue is decided in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent.

ISSUE NO. 2

24.

Taking into account my findings on the issue No.1, it is held that the petitioner has a

cause of action.

25.

This issue is also decided in his favour.

ISSUES NO. 3, 4 and 6.

26.

Not pressed.

ISSUE NO. 5

27.

Reference No. 41/2001 (RBT No.403/04) titled as Sh. Hari Singh vs. The Secretary,

Irrigation & Public Health, Government of H.P., Shimla and two others was disposed of by this

Court/Tribunal per Award dated 13-6-2006 by one of my ld. Predecessors. Issue No.4 was framed

to the effect as to “Whether the reference is barred by time?” Such issue was decided against the

claimant/petitioner Shri Hari Singh. It was held that since the claim petition has been preferred by

the petitioner at a belated stage, the industrial dispute raised by him has become stale because of

which the reference is not maintainable. Consequently, the claim petition was dismissed and the

reference was answered against the workman/petitioner. Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the

Award dated 13-6-2006 rendered by this Court, the petitioner Shri Hari Singh preferred CWP No.

4050 of 2009-H before the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. Such CWP was

allowed by the Hon’ble High Court vide judgment dated 09-10-2012. While setting aside the

Award dated 13-06-2006 passed by this Court/Tribunal, it was observed by the Hon’ble High Court

that “the reference had to be answered by the Labour Court and the question of the reference

having been made belatedly could have been considered at the time of giving the relief”. Similar

view has been expressed by a Division Bench of our Hon’ble High Court in H.P. State Forest

Corporation versus Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla and another, 2012 (133) FLR 684.

Taking into account the observations made in these rulings, it cannot be said that the petition is hit

by the vice of delay and laches.

28.

While testifying in the Court as PW1, the petitioner has given his age as 42 years. It

is well known that a person like the petitioner will not sit at home during the period he is/was out of

the service. Moreover, during the crossexamination, the petitioner admitted that he makes both the

ends meet by doing the days’ drudgery privately. The petitioner has failed to discharge the initial

onus that during the period of his forced idleness, he is/was not gainfully employed. Due to these

reasons, he is not entitled to the back wages.

29.

This issue too is decided in favour of the petitioner and against his opponent.

RELIEF (ISSUE NO. 7)

30.

As a sequel to my findings on the issues No.1, 2 and 5 above, the instant claim

petition succeeds in part and the same is partly allowed. The termination of the services of the

petitioner by the respondent is set aside and quashed. The respondent is directed to reengage the

petitioner forthwith. He shall be entitled to the seniority and continuity in service from the date of

6199

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

his illegal termination i.e. 25-04-2000 except back wages. The respondent is also directed to

consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services as per the policies framed by the

Government of Himachal Pradesh from time to time. It is made clear that if the services of any

person junior to the petitioner have already been regularized, he (petitioner) shall be entitled to the

regularization from the date/month of the regularization of the services of his junior(s). Parties to

bear their own costs.

31.

The reference is answered in the aforesaid terms.

32.

A copy of this Award be sent to the appropriate Govt. for publication in the official

gazette.

33.

File after due completion be consigned to the Record Room.

Announced in the open Court today this 1st day of October, 2013.

RAJAN GUPTA,

Presiding Judge,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

Labour Court, Dharamshala,

H.P.

________

IN THE COURT OF RAJAN GUPTA, PRESIDING JUDGE, LABOUR COURT-CUM-

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, DHARAMSHALA, H.P.

Ref No.

: 220/2012

Date of Institution

: 17.4.2012

Date of Decision

: 01.10.2013

Shri Bam Dev s/o Shri Om Prakash, r/o Village and P.O. Sulah, Tehsil Palampur, District

Kangra, H.P.

..Petitioner.

Versus

The Director, KAYAKALP Vivekanand Medical Research Trust, Palampur, District

Kangra, H.P.

..Respondent.

Reference under Section 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

For the Petitioner

: Sh. N.L. Kaundal, AR

: Sh. Vijay Kaundal, Adv.

For the Respondent : Sh. S.K. Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

The below given reference has been received from the appropriate Government for

adjudication:

6200

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

“Whether the termination of services of Shri Bam Dev S/O Shri Om Prakash, Village and

P.O. Sulah, Tehsil Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. by the Director, KAYAKALP

Vivekanand Medical Research Trust, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. w.e.f. 01-07-2010

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

justified? If not, to what amount of back wages, past service benefits, seniority and

compensation the above worker is entitled to from the above employer?”

The case of the petitioner (as set out in the statement of claim/demand) is that his

services were engaged by the respondent as Yoga & Nature Cure Assistant w.e.f. 29.10.2005. He

continuously worked as such up-to 30.6.2010. His monthly salary was Rs.3500/-. During the entire

service tenure, his work and conduct was fully satisfactory. No show cause/explanation letter was

received by him from his superiors regarding the misconduct, if any. On 1st July, 2010 his services

were terminated by the respondent by a verbal order. Before the termination of his services, neither

he was charge-sheeted nor an inquiry was conducted against him for the misconduct, if any. One

month pay in lieu of the notice period and retrenchment compensation were also not paid to him by

the respondent/trust. He had completed 240 days of work in each and every calendar year of his

employment as well as in a block of 12 calendar months preceding the date of his termination i.e.

01.7.2010. At the time of the retrenchment, the seniority list of the security guards was not supplied

to him by the respondent. The persons junior to him were retained in service by the

respondent/management. The latter failed to abide by the principle of ‘last come first go’. Not only

this, after his disengagement, new/fresh hands have been appointed by the respondent through Jai

Prakash Associates Pvt. Ltd. He was not given an opportunity of re-employment. The employees of

the respondent/trust had formed a workers union under the Trade Unions Act, 1926. He (petitioner)

was a member of the said union. His services have been terminated alongwith the President and

three other members of the union due to the union activities, which amounts to unfair labour

practice. After the disengagement, he approached the respondent time and again for re-

employment, but in vain. The demand notice served upon the respondent by him did not have the

desired effect. He is/was the only earning member in the family. After the termination of his

services, he is unemployed. The act and conduct of the respondent is illegal and unjustified. It is

also violative of the provisions of Sections 25-F, 25-G and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 (14 of 1947, ‘the Act’ for short).

As such, as is evident from the prayer clause of the petition/statement of claim, the

petitioner has claimed the following relief(s) in this case:-

“i) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be set aside the illegal termination order dated

01.07.2010 and directed to respondent to reinstate the services of applicant with full back

wages, in continuity of service, seniority with all other consequential service benefits.

ii) Any other relief the Hon’ble Court deems fit may kindly be granted in the favour of

applicant and against the respondent”.

On notice, the respondent appeared. He filed detailed reply controverting the

averments made in the petition/statement of claim. Preliminary objections have been taken to the

effect that the petitioner did not complete 90 or 240 days of work preceding the date of his alleged

ultimate termination i.e. 01.7.2010. The petitioner is gainfully employed. Earlier, he abandoned the

job on 1st July, 2008. The said fact was admitted by the petitioner vide letter dated 19.4.2010. The

trust is a charitable institution. The claim petition is not maintainable. The petitioner was working

as a contractual appointee. The terms and conditions of the engagement as contained in the

appointment letter make it clear that the services of the petitioner can be terminated at any time if

the circumstances so warrant.

6201

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

On merits, it has been owned that the services of the petitioner were engaged as a Yoga &

Nature Cure Assistant on 29.10.2005. However, it has been denied that he worked continuously as

such up-to 30.6.2010. Actually, the petitioner voluntarily left the service on 01.7.2008. Thereafter,

he never turned up till 19.4.2010. On that day i.e. 19.4.2010, the petitioner submitted an

application/letter to re-engage his services. On the basis of the request made by the petitioner, he

was re-employed from 19.4.2010 to 30.6.2010. During the intervening period from 01.7.2008 to

18.4.2010, the petitioner was gainfully employed. He has concealed a material fact from the Court

that he willingly abandoned the job on 01.7.2008 and did not work up-to 18.4.2010. On 1st July,

2010, the services of the petitioner were never terminated as alleged. He left the job once again

after working for one month and 20 days only. The petitioner did not complete 240 days of work in

any calendar year of his employment. After 01.7.2010, the petitioner never approached him

(respondent) for re-engagement. The services of the petitioner and others were not terminated on

account of the union activities as alleged. No person junior to the petitioner has been retained in

service. Even after the alleged disengagement of the services of the petitioner, no new/fresh hands

have been appointed. The management has nothing to do with any appointment made by Jai

Prakash Pvt. Ltd.. The services of the petitioner were never engaged as a security guard. For this

reason, the question of supplying the seniority list of the security guards to him does not arise. No

workers’ union existed uptil 30.6.2010. No provision of the Act has been flouted. Since the

petitioner voluntarily left the service, he is not entitled to any protection under the Act. The claim

petition is false and baseless. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

In these circumstances, the respondent prays that the petition in hand be dismissed.

In the rejoinder, the petitioner has reiterated the contents of the petition/statement of

claim and refuted the objections put forth by the respondent. It has been maintained that the work

for which he was employed is of a permanent nature. Contractual appointment was given to him

only with a view to throw him out of the job without any notice and paying the retrenchment

compensation.

Per order dated 16.8.2012, following issues were struck:

Whether the termination of the services of the petitioner by the respondent w.e.f.

01.7.2010 is illegal and unjustified as alleged?

..OPP.

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

Relief.

I have heard ld. AR/counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.

For the reasons detailed here under, my findings on the above issues are as follows:-

Issue No. 1

: No

Issue No. 2

: Yes

Relief.

: Claim petition dismissed vide operative portion of the Award.

REASONS FOR FINDINGS

ISSUE NO. 1

The petitioner Shri Bam Dev stepped into the witness box as PW1. In his affidavit

Ex. PW1/A submitted under Order 18 Rule 4 CPC, he reiterated on oath the contents of the

petition/statement of claim in its entirety.

6202

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

In the cross-examination, he admitted that he joined the service after going through the

contents of the appointment letter as well as admitting the terms and conditions of employment to

be correct. He also admitted that his services used to be engaged temporarily and on yearly basis.

Exts. R1 to R3 are the copies of the appointment letters which were issued in his name. He denied

that on 01.7.2008 he left the service. Self stated, the supervisor had told him that he should not

report for duty. He admitted that on 19.4.2010, he had moved an application (Ex.R4) before the

respondent. He even admitted that from the year 2008 to 2010, he was running a vegetable shop at

Sulah. Volunteered, he was called by the respondent in the year 2010. He denied that he did not

work for 90 days in the year 2010. He admitted that after 01.7.2010, he is continuously working as

a vegetable seller. He further admitted that from the year 2008 to 18/19/4/2010, he did not serve

under the respondent. He admitted that when he abandoned the job in the year 2008, he was the

junior most Yoga and Nature Cure Assistant. He admitted that he worked for one month and 20

days only in the year 2010. During his service tenure, there was no workers union. He denied that

he is not entitled to re-employment etc.

Conversely, Shri Sudershan Sharma, Director KAYAKALP, V.M.R.T., Palampur

(respondent) testified as RW1. In his affidavit Ex. RW1/A preferred as per Order 18 Rule 4 CPC,

he corroborated on oath the contents of the reply filed by him.

In the cross-examination, he admitted that when the services of the petitioner were

disengaged, one month notice was not given to him. The retrenchment compensation too was not

paid. Self stated, the petitioner was employed on 19/4/2010 and he worked for only two months.

10.

It is the admitted case of the parties that the services of the petitioner were initially

engaged as a Yoga & Nature Cure Assistant on 29.10.2005. The version of the petitioner that he

worked continuously as such upto 30.6.2010 stands falsified in view of the admissions made by

him as PW1. The petitioner (PW1) also admitted that his services used to be engaged by the

respondent temporarily and on yearly basis from time to time as well as Exs. R1 to R3 are the

copies of the appointment letters which were issued in his favour by the respondent. The petitioner

(PW1) even admitted that he joined the service after reading the appointment letters as well as

admitting the terms and conditions of the employment to be correct.

11.

During the cross-examination, the petitioner (PW1) admitted that he had abandoned

the job in the year 2008. At that time he was the junior most Yoga & Nature Cure Assistant. From

the year 2008 to 2010, he ran a vegetable shop at Sulah. Even after 01.7.2010, he is working as a

vegetable vendor.

12.

There is no denial of the fact that on 19.4.2010, the petitioner had moved an

application, the copy of which is Ex. R4 before the respondent. In the application, he admitted that

due to certain family circumstances and the mistakes committed by him, he had voluntarily left the

service. Now, he be reemployed. Pursuant to this application preferred by the applicant/petitioner,

his services were engaged on contractual basis by the respondent from 19.4.2010 to 30.6.2010 only.

The petitioner (PW1) admitted that from 01.7.2010 onwards he is dealing in the vegetables.

13.

The version of the petitioner that his services were disengaged by the respondent

due to union activities seems to be totally false and baseless since the petitioner (PW1) admitted

that during his service tenure, there was no workers union. The assertion of the petitioner that his

services were unlawfully terminated by the respondent w.e.f. 1st July, 2010 also seems to be totally

false and baseless taking into account his act and conduct. The petitioner categorically admitted in

the application dated 19.4.2010 (Ex. R4) that he had earlier left the service voluntarily. From the

evidence available on the record, it can be gathered that the petitioner is telling the lies at every step

6203

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

just to gain the employment by hook or crook. As already mentioned, his assertion that he served

the respondent/trust continuously from 29.10.2005 to 30.6.2010 is totally false.

14.

It is the basic law that a workman has to prove that he had worked for 240 days or

more in a block of 12 calendar months anterior to the date of alleged termination. The evidence

adduced by the parties clarifies that the petitioner served the respondent from 19.4.2010 to

30.6.2010 i.e. for less than 60 days. There is nothing to show that the petitioner had worked for 240

or more days as envisaged under Section 25-B of the Act. The provisions of Section 25-F of the

Act are thus not attracted in this case.

15.

The petitioner has not disclosed the name of any person junior to him who was

retained in service by the respondent at the time of his alleged retrenchment. Not only this, the

petitioner failed to divulge the name of any person, whose services have been allegedly engaged by

the respondent after the termination in question. The provisions of Sections 25-G and 25-H of the

Act are also not attracted in this case. Moreover, the petitioner (PW1) in his cross-examination

admitted that when he abandoned the service in the year 2008, he was the junior most Yoga &

Nature Cure Assistant.

16.

So far as the service rules relating to treatment assistants employed by the

respondent/institution are concerned, they make it crystal clear that the contractual appointment can

be terminated at any time during the contract period if the circumstances so warrant. In the present

case, there is nothing to show that the services of the petitioner were disengaged during the contract

period. Rather, as already mentioned, the period of his contractual appointment had come to an end

on 30.6.2010. Section 2 (oo) (bb) of the Act postulates that the termination of the services of a

workman as a result of the non renewal of contract of employment on the expiry of such contract

period will not amount to retrenchment.

17.

Such being the situation, I have no hesitation to conclude that the respondent has not

contravened any provision of the Act. The petitioner willingly left the job on the expiry of the

contract period. The avarice of the petitioner to gain employment in a wrongful manner has forced

him to prefer a totally false and baseless claim. He is not entitled to any relief.

18.

This issue is decided against the petitioner and in favour of the respondent.

ISSUE NO. 2

19.

Taking into account my findings on issue No. 1 above, it is held that the claim

petition is not maintainable in the present form. The petitioner, who is a liar, has suppressed the

material facts from the Court because of which he is required to be non suited.

20.

This issue is also decided against the petitioner.

RELIEF (ISSUE NO. 3)

21.

In view of my findings on the issues No. 1 and 2, the instant claim petition being

meritless, not maintainable and malafide fails. It is, therefore, dismissed with costs quantified as

Rs.3,000/- (Three thousand only).

22.

The reference is answered in the aforesaid terms.

23.

A copy of this Award be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the

official gazette.

6204

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

24.

File after due completion be consigned to the Record Room.

Announced in the open Court today this 1st day of October, 2013.

RAJAN GUPTA,

Presiding Judge,

Labour Court-cum-Industrial

Tribunal, Dharamshala, H.P.

_________

IN THE COURT OF RAJAN GUPTA, PRESIDING JUDGE, LABOUR COURT-CUM-

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, DHARAMSHALA, H.P.

Ref No.

: 218/2012

Date of Institution

: 17.4.2012

Date of Decision

: 01.10.2013

Shri Pritam Chand s/o Shri Thakur Dass, r/o Village and P.O. Jandpur, Tehsil Baijnath,

District Kangra, H.P.

..Petitioner.

Versus

The Director, KAYAKALP Vivekanand Medical Research Trust, Palampur, District

Kangra, H.P.

..Respondent.

Reference under Section 10 (1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

For the Petitioner

: Sh. N.L. Kaundal, AR

: Sh. Vijay Kaundal, Adv.

For the Respondent : Sh. S.K. Sharma, Adv.

AWARD

The below given reference has been received from the appropriate Government for

adjudication:

“Whether the termination of services of Shri Pritam Chand S/O Shri Thakur Dass, Village

and P.O. Jandpur, Tehsil Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P. by the Director, KAYAKALP

Vivekanand Medical Research Trust, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. w.e.f. 19-06-2010

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

justified? If not, to what amount of back wages, past service benefits, seniority and

compensation the above worker is entitled to from the above employer?”

The case of the petitioner (as set out in the statement of claim/demand) is that his

services were engaged by the respondent as a Security Guard w.e.f. 10.11.2005. He was drawing

Rs.3500/- per month as salary. He continuously worked as such up-to 19.6.2010 as well as

completed 240 days of work in each and every calendar year of his employment. During the service

6205

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 28 tuojh] 2014@8 ek?k] 1935

tenure, his work and conduct was satisfactory. No complaint was received against him by the

management/trust/respondent. Even his explanation was not called for the misconduct, if any. To

his utter surprise, a letter dated 19.6.2010 was received by him. As per the said letter, his services

were terminated from 19.6.2010 itself. Before the termination of his services, neither any show

cause notice was given to him nor he was charge-sheeted for the misconduct if any. No inquiry was

conducted against him. One month pay in lieu of the notice period and the retrenchment