jkti=] fgekpy izns'k

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

lkseokj] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

fgekpy izns'k ljdkj

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 18th April, 2016

No. 11-23/84(Lab) ID/2016-Mandi (Part-II).—Whereas Shri Pushap Raj S/O Shri Dev

Mani, R/O Village and Post Office Bagsaid, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi, H.P. had raised a

demand notice dated 23.01.2008 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the

Executive Engineer, I.&P.H. Division, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. The Labour Officer-

cum-Conciliation Officer, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute

78&jkti=@2017&17&07&2017

¼3953½

3954

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

amicably, but the same could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where

after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour

Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Mandi,

District Mandi, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a belated stage of

more than 7 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 18.06.2010;

And whereas Shri Pushap Raj S/O Shri Dev Mani agitated the above orders of declining of

reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 4853/2015. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 5.1.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider the

cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision within

eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Pushap Raj S/O Shri Dev Mani, R/O

Village and Post Office Bagsaid, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi, H.P. during November,

2000 by the Executive Engineer, I.&P.H. Division, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P.,

who had worked as beldar on daily wages for 169 days during year, 1999 and 219 days

during year, 2000 respectively and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 7 years

vide demand notice dated 23.01.2008, without complying the provisions of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified ? If not, keeping in view of working period of 169

days during year, 1999 and 219 days during year, 2000 respectively and delay of more than

7 years in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service

benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above

employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

3955

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 18th April, 2016

No. 11-23/84(Lab) ID/2016-Mandi (Part-II).—Whereas Shri Ganga Ram S/O Shri

Narotam Ram, R/O Village Khanayari, P.O. Kandha, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi, H.P. had

raised a demand notice dated 23.01.2008 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the

Executive Engineer, I.&P.H. Division, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. The Labour Officer-

cum- Conciliation Officer, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute

amicably, but the same could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where

after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour

Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Mandi,

District Mandi, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a belated stage of

more than 7 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order No.11-

23/84(Lab)I.D./2010-Mandi, dated June, 2010;

And whereas Shri Ganga Ram S/O Shri Narotam Ram agitated the above orders of

declining of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High

Court of Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 4853/2015. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal

Pradesh has disposed off the civil writ petition on 5.1.2016 and directed the respondents to consider

the case of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the

Hon’ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal

Pradesh State Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment

is reproduced as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006-IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Ganga Ram S/O Shri Narotam Ram, R/O

Village Khanayari, P.O. Kandha, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi, H.P. during November,

2000 by the Executive Engineer, I.&P.H. Division, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P.,

who had worked as beldar on daily wages for 211 days during year, 2000 and has raised his

industrial dispute after more than 7 years vide demand notice dated 23.01.2008, without

complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified ? If not,

keeping in view of working period of 211 days during year, 2000 and delay of more than 7

years in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service

3956

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above

employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 3rd May, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Raghubir S/O Shri Prabh Dayal, R/O

Village Reley, P.O. Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand notice dated

23.7.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive Engineer,

H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer,

Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same

could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employer

before the concerned conciliation officer above worker had not worked with the employer and

raised the dispute at a belated stage of more than 20 years and therefore declined the reference of

the dispute vide order dated 25.11.2014;

And whereas Shri Raghubir S/O Shri Prabh Dayal agitated the above orders of declining of

reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 249/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 23.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006-IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

3957

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Raghubir S/O Shri Prabh Dayal, R/O

Village Reley, P.O. Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during December, 1990 by

the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., who had

worked as beldar on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 20

years vide demand notice dated 23.07.2011, without complying the provisions of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman, is legal and justified? If not,

keeping in view of delay of more than 20 years in raising the industrial dispute, what

amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above

exworker is entitled to from the above employer /management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 11April, 2016

No. 11-5/99(Lab) ID/2016-Chamba.—Whereas Shri Raj Kumar S/O Shri Dhiana Ram,

R/O Village Angari, P.O. Prena, Tehsil and District Chamba, H.P. had raised a demand notice

dated –nil-received in Labour Office, Chamba on 8.6.2011 regarding his illegal termination from

the services by the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P.

The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. tried to settle the

industrial dispute amicably, but the same could not be settled during the course of conciliation

proceedings, where after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Chamba,

District Chamba, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a belated stage of

more than 7 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 5.2.2013;

And whereas Shri Raj Kumar S/O Shri Dhiana Ram agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 148/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 23.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

3958

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider the

cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision within

eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4.

The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Raj Kumar S/O Shri Dhiana Ram, R/O

Village Angari, P.O. Prena, Tehsil and District Chamba, H.P. during March, 2004 by the

Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P., who had

worked as daily wages worker and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 7 years

vide demand notice dated-nil-received on 08.06.2011, without complying the provisions of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of delay of

more than 7 years in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority,

past service benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above

employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 26th April, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Rajinder Kumar S/O Shri Chhaju

Ram, R/O Village and Post Office Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a

demand notice dated 23.7.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive

Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation

Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the

same could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a

belated stage of about 24 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated

13.11.2014;

3959

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

And whereas Shri Rajinder Kumar S/O Shri Chhaju Ram agitated the above orders of

declining of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High

Court of Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 258/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal

Pradesh has disposed off the civil writ petition on 25.2.2016 and directed the respondents to

consider the case of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by

the Hon’ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus

Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the

judgment is reproduced as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Rajinder Kumar S/O Shri Chhaju Ram,

R/O Village and Post Office Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during August,

1987 by the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., who

had worked as beldar on daily wages for 12 days during year, 1987 and has raised his

industrial dispute after about 24 years vide demand notice dated 23.7.2011, without

complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified ? If not,

keeping in view of working period of 12 days during year, 1987 and delay of about 24 years

in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits

and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/

management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 26th April, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Ramesh Chand S/O Shri Beli Ram,

R/O Village Dadheru, P.O. Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand

notice dated 23.7.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive

Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation

3960

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the

same could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a

belated stage of more than 24 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order

dated 13.11.2014;

And whereas Shri Ramesh Chand S/O Shri Beli Ram agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 247/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 23.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider the

cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision within

eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Ramesh Chand S/O Shri Beli Ram, R/O

Village Dadheru, P.O. Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during March, 1987 by

the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., who had

worked as beldar on daily wages for 60 days during year, 1986 and 14 days during year,

1987 respectively and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 24 years vide demand

notice dated 23.7.2011, without complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 is legal and justified ? If not, keeping in view of working period of 60 days during

year, 1986 and 14 days during year, 1987 respectively and delay of more than 24 years in

raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits

and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/

management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

3961

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 11 April, 2016

No. 11-5/99(Lab) ID/2016-Chamba.—Whereas Shri Rattan Chand S/O Shri Ronki Ram,

R/O Village Chanehla, P.O. Preena, Tehsil and District Chamba, H.P. had raised a demand notice

dated 30.05.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive Engineer,

H.P.P.W.D. Division, Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum- Conciliation

Officer, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same

could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Chamba,

District Chamba, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a belated stage of

more than 7 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 4.2.2013;

And whereas Shri Rattan Chand S/O Shri Ronki Ram agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 149/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 25.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006-IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Rattan Chand S/O Shri Ronki Ram, R/O

Village Chanehla, P.O. Preena, Tehsil and District Chamba, H.P. during March, 2004 by the

Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P., who had worked as

beldar on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 7 years vide demand

notice dated 30.05.2011, without complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is

legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of delay of more than 7 years in raising the industrial

3962

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above

ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 26th April, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Roop Lal S/O Shri Karam Chand, R/O

Village and Post Office Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand notice

dated 23.7.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive Engineer,

H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer,

Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same

could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the employer before the

concerned conciliation officer, above worker had not worked with the employer and raised the

dispute at a belated stage of more than 20 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute

vide order dated 6.12.2014;

And whereas Shri Roop Lal S/O Shri Karam Chand agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 243/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 23.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

3963

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Roop Lal S/O Shri Karam Chand, R/O

Village and Post Office Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during April, 1990 by

the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., who had

worked as beldar on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 20

years vide demand notice dated 23.07.2011, without complying the provisions of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of delay of more

than 20 years in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past

service benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above

employer /management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 13th July, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Roop Singh S/O Shri Inga Ram, R/O

Village Aund Tikka Par Nala, .P.O. Aund, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a

demand notice dated-nil-received in Labour Office, Dharamshala on 13.06.2011 regarding his

illegal termination from the services by (1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur,

Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali,

Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same could not be

settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report under Section

12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employers worker has not

worked with the employers No. (1) & (2) and had raised the dispute at a belated stage of after about

21 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 22.08.2013;

And whereas Shri Roop Singh S/O Shri Inga Ram agitated the above orders of declining of

reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 634/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 28.03.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case

of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble

High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh

State Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is

reproduced as follows;

3964

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Roop Singh S/O Shri Inga Ram, R/O

Village Aund Tikka Par Nala, P.O. Aund, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during year,

1990 by (1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil Nurpur, District

Kangra, H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil Nurpur,

District Kangra, H.P., who had worked on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute

after about 21 years vide demand notice dated-nil-received on 13.06.2011, without

complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman,

is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of delay of about 21 years in raising the

industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and

compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 11th April, 2016

No. 11-5/99(Lab) ID/2016-Chamba.—Whereas Shri Sanjay Kumar S/O Shri Devia Ram,

R/O Village Angari, P.O. Preena, Tehsil and District Chamba, H.P. had raised a demand notice

dated 30.05.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive Engineer,

H.P.P.W.D. Division, Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation

Officer, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same

could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Chamba,

District Chamba, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

3965

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a belated stage of

more than 7 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 5.2.2013;

And whereas Shri Sanjay Kumar S/O Shri Devia Ram agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 146/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 22.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 titled as Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Sanjay Kumar S/O Shri Devia Ram, R/O

Village Angari, P.O. Preena, Tehsil and District Chamba, H.P. during February, 2003 by the

Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P., who had

worked as beldar on daily wages for 49 ½ days during year, 2002 and 25 days during year,

2003 respectively and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 7 years vide demand

notice dated 30.05.2011, without complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 is legal and justified ? If not, keeping in view of working period of 49 ½ days during

year, 2002 and 25 days during year, 2003 respectively and delay of more than 7 years in

raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits

and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/

management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 1st July, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Sham Singh S/O Shri Sahib Singh,

R/O Village Haddal Chikli, P.O. Haddal, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand

notice dated-nil-received in Labour Office, Dharamshala on 13.06.2011 regarding his illegal

3966

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

termination from the services by (1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil

Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil

Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala, District

Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same could not be settled during

the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employers worker has not

worked with the employers No. (1) & (2) and had raised the dispute at a belated stage of after about

21 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 22.08.2013;

And whereas Shri Sham Singh S/O Shri Sahib Singh agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 782/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 7.4.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider the

cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision within eight weeks.

The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006-IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Sham Singh S/O Shri Sahib Singh, R/O

Village Haddal Chikli, P.O. Haddal, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during year, 1990

by (1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil Nurpur, District

Kangra, H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil Nurpur,

District Kangra, H.P., who had worked on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute

after about 21 years vide demand notice dated-nil-received on 13.06.2011, without

complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman,

is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of delay of after about 21 years in raising the

industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and

compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

3967

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 30th May, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Sham Sunder S/O Shri Karam Chand,

R/O Village and Post Office Khanni, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand

notice datednil- received in Labour Office, Dharamshala on 04.03.2013 regarding his illegal

termination from the services by (1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil

Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil

Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala, District

Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same could not be settled during

the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employers

worker has not worked with the employers No. (1) & (2) and had raised the dispute at a belated

stage of more than 22 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated

24.03.2015;

And whereas Shri Sham Sunder S/O Shri Karam Chand agitated the above orders of

declining of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High

Court of Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 750/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal

Pradesh has disposed off the civil writ petition on 6.4.2016 and directed the respondents to consider

the case of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the

Hon’ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal

Pradesh State Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment

is reproduced as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006-IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Sham Sunder S/O Shri Karam Chand, R/O

Village and Post Office Khanni, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during year, 1990 by

(1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra,

H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil Nurpur, District

Kangra, H.P., who had worked on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after

more than 22 years vide demand notice dated-nil-received on 04.03.2013, without

3968

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman,

is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of delay of more than 22 years in raising the

industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and

compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the28th April, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Shamsher Singh S/O Shri Bhiroo

Ram, R/O Village and Post Office Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a

demand notice dated 23.7.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive

Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-

Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute

amicably, but the same could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where

after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour

Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employer

before the concerned conciliation officer above worker had not worked with the employer and

raised the dispute at a belated stage of more than 20 years and therefore declined the reference of

the dispute vide order dated 6.12.2014;

And whereas Shri Shamsher Singh S/O Shri Bhiroo Ram agitated the above orders of

declining of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High

Court of Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 246/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal

Pradesh has disposed off the civil writ petition on 25.2.2016 and directed the respondents to

consider the case of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by

the Hon’ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus

Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the

judgment is reproduced as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and makea decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

3969

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Shamsher Singh S/O Shri Bhiroo Ram,

R/O Village and Post Office Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during December,

1990 by the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., who

had worked as beldar on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 20

years vide demand notice dated 23.07.2011, without complying the provisions of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman, is legal and justified? If not,

keeping in view of delay of more than 20 years in raising the industrial dispute, what

amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above ex-

worker is entitled to from the above employer /management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 30th May, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Sher Singh S/o Shri Mangat Ram, R/O

Village and Post Office Jaunta, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand notice

datednil- received in Labour Office, Dharamshala on 13.06.2011 regarding his illegal termination

from the services by (1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil Nurpur,

District Kangra, H.P. (2) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil Nurpur,

District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra,

H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same could not be settled during the

course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employers worker has not

worked with the employers No. (1) & (2) and had raised the dispute at a belated stage of about 21

years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 31.08.2013;

And whereas Shri Sher Singh S/o Shri Mangat Ram agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 725/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 5.4.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

3970

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4.

The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Sher Singh S/O Shri Mangat Ram, R/O

Village and Post Office Jaunta, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during year, 1990 by

(1) The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Nurpur, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (2)

The Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P., who

had worked on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after about 21 years vide demand

notice dated-nil-received on 13.06.2011, without complying the provisions of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman, is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view of

delay of about 21 years in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages, seniority, past

service benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above

employer/management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

__________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 3rd May, 2016

No. 11-1/85(Lab) ID/2016-Kangra.—Whereas Shri Sher Singh S/O Shri Charan Singh,

R/O Village Thatheru, P.O. Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. had raised a demand

notice dated 23.7.2011 regarding his illegal termination from the services by the Executive

Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation

Officer, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. tried to settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the

same could not be settled during the course of conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report

under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Dharamshala,

District Kangra, H.P. was considered, examined and Deputy Labour Commissioner, H.P. as

appropriate Government came to the conclusion that as per reply filed by the above employer

3971

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

before the concerned conciliation officer above worker had not worked with the employer and

raised the dispute at a belated stage of more than 20 years and therefore declined the reference of

the dispute vide order dated 13.11.2014;

And whereas Shri Sher Singh S/O Shri Charan Singh agitated the above orders of declining

of reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 260/2016. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 25.2.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006- IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Shri Sher Singh S/O Shri Charan Singh, R/O

Village Thatheru, P.O. Sulyali, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. during December, 1990

by the Executive Engineer, H.P.P.W.D. Division, Jawali, District Kangra, H.P., who had

worked as beldar on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after more than 20

years vide demand notice dated 23.07.2011, without complying the provisions of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by the workman, is legal and justified? If not,

keeping in view of delay of more than 20 years in raising the industrial dispute, what

amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above

exworker is entitled to from the above employer /management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

___________

LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-171001, the 4th May, 2016

No. 11-23/84(Lab) ID/2016-Mandi (Part-II).—Whereas Mr. Sohan Lal S/O Shri Dila

Ram, R/O Village Bali Dhar, P.O. Thunag, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi, H.P. had raised a

demand notice dated –nilreceived in Labour Office, Mandi on 06.03.2009 regarding his illegal

3972

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

termination from the services by the Executive Engineer, I.&P.H. Division, Sunder Nagar, District

Mandi, H.P. The Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. tried to

settle the industrial dispute amicably, but the same could not be settled during the course of

conciliation proceedings, where after he sent a report under Section 12(4) of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947 to the Labour Commissioner, H.P.;

And whereas the report sent by the Labour Officer-cum-Conciliation Officer, Mandi,

District Mandi, H.P. was considered, examined and Labour Commissioner, H.P. as appropriate

Government came to the conclusion that above worker had raised the dispute at a belated stage of

more than 13 years and therefore declined the reference of the dispute vide order dated 28.06.2010;

And whereas Mr. Sohan Lal S/O Shri Dila Ram agitated the above orders of declining of

reference of his industrial dispute to the Ld. Labour Court before the Hon’ble High Court of

Himachal Pradesh vide C.W.P. No. 4855/2015. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh has

disposed off the civil writ petition on 5.1.2016 and directed the respondents to consider the case of

the petitioners, in terms of the judgment, dated 30th December, 2014 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of H.P. in CWP No. 9467 of 2014 case titled Pratap Chand versus Himachal Pradesh State

Electricity Board and others within eight weeks. The operative part of the judgment is reproduced

as follows;

“3. In the given circumstances, we deem it proper to direct the respondents to consider

the cases of the petitioners, in terms of the judgment (supra), and make a decision

within eight weeks. The said judgment shall form part of this judgment also.

4. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications, if

any.”

Therefore, in view of above the undersigned while exercising the powers vested by the

Govt. of Himachal Pradesh vide Notification No. Shram(A)4-9/2006-IV-Loose, Dated 15th

February, 2014 and as per power vested under Sub Section-1 of Section 10 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) this industrial dispute is referred to the Labour Court-cum-

Industrial Tribunal, Dharamsala, constituted under Section-7 of Act ibid, on the following

issue/issues for legal adjudication;

“Whether alleged termination of services of Mr. Sohan Lal S/O Shri Dila Ram, R/O

Village Bali Dhar, P.O. Thunag, Tehsil Thunag, District Mandi, H.P. during November,

1995 by the Executive Engineer, I.&P.H. Division, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P.,

who had worked as beldar on daily wages and has raised his industrial dispute after more

than 13 years vide demand notice dated-nil-received on 06.03.2009, without complying the

provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, keeping in view

of delay of more than 13 years in raising the industrial dispute, what amount of back wages,

seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the

above employer /management?”

By order,

Sd/-

Deputy Labour Commissioner,

Himachal Pradesh.

3973

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

c vnkyr uk;c rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ f}rh; Js.kh] mi&rglhy /khjk]

ftyk dkaxM+k ¼fg0 iz0½

dsl ua0 % 03@2017

rkjh[k is'kh % 31&07&2017

'kh"kZd-&&ges'k flag iq= fnoku pUn] fuoklh egky xn;kM+k] ekStk j>wa] mi&rglhy /khjk] ftyk dkaxM+k]

fg0 iz0

- - izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

fo"k;-&nj[okLr cjk, uke n#Lrh djus ckjsA

ges'k flag iq= fnoku pUn] fuoklh egky xn;kM+k] ekStk j>wa] mi&rglhy /khjk] ftyk dkaxM+k]

fg0 iz0 us bl vnkyr esa izkFkZuk&i= e; 'kiFk&i= bl vk'k; ls is'k fd;k gS fd mldk uke ges'k

flag gSA tcfd egky xn;kM+k] ekStk j>wa] mi&rglhy /khjk ds jktLo vfHkys[k esa egs'k pan n'kkZ;k x;k

gSA vr% egky xn;kM+k] ekStk j>wa ds jktLo vfHkys[k esa mldk uke n#Lr fd;k tk;sA

vr% bl b'rgkj o eqL=h equknh }kjk loZlk/kkj.k dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh dks

mDr uke dh n#Lrh ckjs dksbZ mtj ;k ,rjkt gks rks og fnukad 30&07&2017 dks izkr% 10-00 cts

vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vnkyr vkdj viuk mtj is'k dj ldrk gSA blds mijkUr dksbZ Hkh

mtj ;k ,rjkt tsjs lek;r u gksxk rFkk fu;ekuqlkj mDr uke dh n#Lrh ds vkns'k ikfjr dj fn;s

tk;saxsA

vkt gekjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&

uk;c rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ f}rh; Js.kh]

mi&rglhy /khjk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh] rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0

Buga Ga

cuke

vke turk

fo"k;-&&izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 13¼3½ fgekpy izns'k iathdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1969-

uksfVl cuke vke turkA

Jh Buga Ga iq= Jh Dechen] fuoklh Mcleodganj, rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k us bl

vnkyr esa 'kiFk&i= lfgr eqdÌek nk;j fd;k gS fd mlds iq= uke Tenzin Tendhar dh tUe frfFk

15&10&2006 gS ijUrq ,e0 lh0 /keZ'kkyk esa tUe iathd`r u gSA vr% bls iathd`r fd;s tkus ds vkns'k

fn;s tk;saA bl uksfVl ds }kjk leLr turk dks rFkk lEcfU/kr lEcfU/k;ksa dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd

;fn fdlh dks mijksDr Tenzin Tendhar dk tUe iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs dksbZ ,rjkt gks rks og viuk

3974

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

,rjkt gekjh vnkyr esa fnukad 3&8&17 dks vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk ,rjkt is'k dj

ldrk gS vU;Fkk eqrkfcd 'kiFk&i= tUe frfFk iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs vkns'k ikfjr dj fn;s tk;saxsA

vkt fnukad 7&7&17 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgj

gLrk{kfjr@&

dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh]

/keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

c vnkyr Jh izse yky 'kekZ] dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh ,oa rglhynkj dkaxM+k]

rglhy o ftyk dkaxM+k

fely ua0 % ---------

rkjh[k nk;jk % 21&04&2017

rkjh[k is'kh % 04&08&2017

jkftUnj dqekj

cuke

vke turk

izkFkZuk i= tUe e`R;q iathdj.k tsj /kkjk 13¼3½ vf/kfu;e

izkFkhZ Jh jkftUnj dqekj iq= Jh 'kfDr jke] fuoklh okMZ ua0 7 efUnj cktkj dkaxM+k] rglhy o

ftyk dakxM+k us bl vnkyr esa 'kiFk i= lfgr izkFkZuk&i= xqtkjk gS fd va'kq 'kekZ iq= jkftUnj dqekj

dk tUe fnukad 21&11&2002 dks gqvk Fkk ijUrq ;g tUe rkjh[k vKkurko'k uxj ifj"kn~ dkaxM+k ds

fjdkMZ esa ntZ u gks ldh A

vr% loZlk/kkj.k dks bl b'rgkj }kjk lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn bl tUe rkjh[k iathsj.k ckjs

fdlh dks dksbZ ,rjkt gks rks fnukad 04&08&2017 dks vlkyru ;k odkyru izkr% 10-00 cts bl

vnkyr esa gkftj vkdj viuk ,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gSA fu/kkZfjr vof/k rd dksbZ vkifÙk@,rjkt izkIr

u gksus ij izkFkZuk&i= ij fu;ekuqlkj dk;Zokgh dh tk,xhA

vkt fnukad 29&06&2017 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&

dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh ,oa rglhynkj]

dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh] rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0

Jherh Luxmi Devi

cuke

vke turk

fo"k;-&&izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 13¼3½ fgekpy izns'k iathdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1969-

uksfVl cuke vke turkA

3975

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Jherh Luxmi Devi iRuh Jh Mewa Lal] fuoklh Khaniara, rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k us

bl vnkyr esa 'kiFk&i= lfgr eqdÌek nk;j fd;k gS fd mlds iq= uke Som Bhadur dh tUe frfFk

26&01&1986 gS ijUrq ,e0 lh0 Dharamshala esa tUe iathd`r u gSA vr% bls iathd`r fd;s tkus ds

vkns'k fn;s tk;saA bl uksfVl ds }kjk leLr turk dks rFkk lEcfU/kr lEcfU/k;ksa dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS

fd ;fn fdlh dks mijksDr Som Bhadur dk tUe iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs dksbZ ,rjkt gks rks og viuk

,rjkt gekjh vnkyr esa fnukad 7&8&17 dks vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk ,rjkt is'k dj

ldrk gS vU;Fkk eqrkfcd 'kiFk&i= tUe frfFk iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs vkns'k ikfjr dj fn;s tk;saxsA

vkt fnukad 7&7&17 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgj

gLrk{kfjr@&

dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh]

/keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh] rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0

Jherh Luxmi Devi

cuke

vke turk

fo"k;-&&izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 13¼3½ fgekpy izns'k iathdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1969-

uksfVl cuke vke turkA

Jherh Luxmi Devi iRuh Jh Mewa Lal] fuoklh Khaniara, rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k us

bl vnkyr esa 'kiFk&i= lfgr eqdÌek nk;j fd;k gS fd mlds iq= uke Ajeet Bhadur dh tUe frfFk

12&12&1978 gS ijUrq ,e0 lh0 Dharamshala esa tUe iathd`r u gSA vr% bls iathd`r fd;s tkus ds

vkns'k fn;s tk;saA bl uksfVl ds }kjk leLr turk dks rFkk lEcfU/kr lEcfU/k;ksa dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS

fd ;fn fdlh dks mijksDr Ajeet Bhadur dk tUe iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs dksbZ ,rjkt gks rks og viuk

,rjkt gekjh vnkyr esa fnukad 7&8&17 dks vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk ,rjkt is'k dj

ldrk gS vU;Fkk eqrkfcd 'kiFk&i= tUe frfFk iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs vkns'k ikfjr dj fn;s tk;saxsA

vkt fnukad 7&7&17 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgj

gLrk{kfjr@&

dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh]

/keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh] rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0

Jh Ashish Kumar Thapa

cuke

vke turk

fo"k;-&&izkFkZuk&i= tsj /kkjk 13¼3½ fgekpy izns'k iathdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1969-

uksfVl cuke vke turkA

3976

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

Jh Ashish Kumar Thapa iq= Jh Bishan Singh Thapa] fuoklh Dari, rglhy /keZ'kkyk] ftyk

dkaxM+k us bl vnkyr esa 'kiFk&i= lfgr eqdÌek nk;j fd;k gS fd mlds iq= uke Ankit Thapa dh

tUe frfFk 30&9&1994 gS ijUrq ,e0 lh0 Dharamshala esa tUe iathd`r u gSA vr% bls iathd`r fd;s

tkus ds vkns'k fn;s tk;saA bl uksfVl ds }kjk leLr turk dks rFkk lEcfU/kr lEcfU/k;ksa dks lwfpr fd;k

tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh dks mijksDr Ankit Thapa dk tUe iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs dksbZ ,rjkt gks rks

og viuk ,rjkt gekjh vnkyr esa fnukad 3&8&17 dks vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk

,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gS vU;Fkk eqrkfcd 'kiFk&i= tUe frfFk iathd`r fd;s tkus ckjs vkns'k ikfjr dj

fn;s tk;saxsA

vkt fnukad 7&7&17 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgj

gLrk{kfjr@&

dk;Zdkjh n.Mkf/kdkjh]

/keZ'kkyk] ftyk dkaxM+k] fg0 iz0A

___________

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] lU/kksy] ftyk e.Mh ¼fg0 iz0½

fely uEcj % 13@2017

rkjh[k ejtqvk % 23&06&2017 rkjh[k is'kh % 20&07&2017

Jh j.kthr dqekj iq= Lo0 Jh pUn jke] fuoklh xkao prjkS.k] Mkd[kkuk /kykjka] ftyk e.Mh

¼fg0 iz0½

- - izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

- - Qjhdnks;eA

v/khu /kkjk 37¼2½ Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ds rgr vkosnu i=A

Jh j.kthr dqekj iq= Lo0 Jh pUn jke] fuoklh xkao prjkS.k] Mkd[kkuk /kykjka] ftyk e.Mh

¼fg0 iz0½ }kjk leLr vkSipkfjdrkvksa lfgr bl U;k;ky; esa izLrqr vkosnu i= esa mYys[k fd;k gS fd

mlds firk dk okLrfod uke pUn jke gS tcfd jktLo vfHkys[k egky prjkS.k esa mudk uke jkepUnj

ntZ gS tks fd xyr gS blfy, mlus fuosnu fd;k gS fd jktLo vfHkys[k egky pejkS.k eas n:Lrh dh

tkdj mlds firk dk uke jkepUnj mQZ pUn jke ntZ fd;k tk,A

vr% blls iwoZ fd ekeyk esa v/khu /kkjk 37¼2½ Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ds rgr vkxkeh

vko';d dkjZokbZ vey esa ykbZ tk,] bl uksfVl }kjk tu&lk/kkj.k dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn

fdlh dks mijksDr ekeyk esa dksbZ mtj@,rjkt gks rks og bl U;k;ky; esa fnukad 20&07&2017 dks

izkr% 10-00 cts vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk mtj@,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gS vU;Fkk xSj

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

vkt fnukad 23&06&2017 dks gekjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgjA

txnh'k yky]

lgk;d lekgrkZ] izFke Js.kh]

lU/kksy] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0A

3977

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] lU/kksy] ftyk e.Mh ¼fg0 iz0½

fely uEcj % 12@2017

rkjh[k ejtqvk % 15&06&2017

rkjh[k is'kh % 20&07&2017

Jh Jo.k dqekj iq= Jh vuUr jke] fuoklh xkao vIij cSjh] Mkd[kkuk dksBqoka] ftyk e.Mh

¼fg0 iz0½

- - izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

- - Qjhdnks;eA

v/khu /kkjk 37¼2½ Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ds rgr vkosnu i=A

Jh Jo.k dqekj iq= Jh vuUr jke] fuoklh xkao vIij cSjh] Mkd[kkuk dksBqoka] ftyk e.Mh

¼fg0 iz0½ }kjk leLr vkSipkfjdrkvksa lfgr bl U;k;ky; esa izLrqr vkosnu i= esa mYys[k fd;k gS fd

mlds firk dk okLrfod uke vuUr jke gS tcfd jktLo vfHkys[k egky vIij cSjh esa mudk uke uksrk

ntZ gS tks fd xyr gS blfy, mlus fuosnu fd;k gS fd jktLo vfHkys[k egky vIij cSjh esa n:Lrh dh

tkdj mlds firk dk uke uksrk mQZ vuUr jke ntZ fd;k tk,A

vr% blls iwoZ fd ekeyk esa v/khu /kkjk 37¼2½ Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ds rgr vkxkeh

vko';d dkjZokbZ vey eas ykbZ tk,] bl uksfVl }kjk tu&lk/kkj.k dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn

fdlh dks mijksDr ekeyk esa dksbZ mtj@,rjkt gks rks og bl U;k;ky; eas fnukad 20&07&2017 dks

izkr% 10-00 cts vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk mtj@,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gS vU;Fkk xSj

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

vkt fnukad 15&06&2017 dks gekjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgjA

txnh'k yky]

lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

lU/kksy] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&

c vnkyr rglhynkj ,oa lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] lU/kksy] ftyk e.Mh ¼fg0 iz0½

fely uEcj % 11@2017

rkjh[k ejtqvk % 15&06&2017

rkjh[k is'kh % 20&07&2017

Jh Jo.k dqekj iq= Jh vuUr jke] fuoklh xkao vIij cSjh] Mkd[kkuk dksBqoka] ftyk e.Mh

¼fg0 iz0½

- - izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

- - Qjhdnks;eA

v/khu /kkjk 37¼2½ Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ds rgr vkosnu i=A

Jh Jo.k dqekj iq= Jh vuUr jke] fuoklh xkao vIij cSjh] Mkd[kkuk dksBqoka] ftyk e.Mh

¼fg0 iz0½ }kjk leLr vkSipkfjdrkvksa lfgr bl U;k;ky; esa izLrqr vkosnu i= esa mYys[k fd;k gS fd

mldk okLrfod uke Jo.k dqekj gS tcfd jktLo vfHkys[k eqgky vIij cSjh esa mldk uke ljouw ntZ gS

3978

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

tks fd xyr gS blfy, mlus fuosnu fd;k gS fd jktLo vfHkys[k egky vIij cSjh esa n:Lrh dh tkdj

mldk uke ljouw mQZ Jo.k dqekj ntZ fd;k tk,A

vr% blls iwoZ fd ekeyk esa v/khu /kkjk 37¼2½ Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1954 ds rgr vkxkeh

vko';d dkjZokbZ vey eas ykbZ tk,] bl uksfVl }kjk tu&lk/kkj.k dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn

fdlh dks mijksDr ekeyk esa dksbZ mtj@,rjkt gks rks og bl U;k;ky; eas fnukad 20&07&2017 dks

izkr% 10-00 cts vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj viuk mtj@,rjkt is'k dj ldrk gSA vU;Fkk xSj

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

vkt fnukad 15&06&2017 dks gekjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr }kjk tkjh fd;k x;kA

eksgjA

txnh'k yky]

lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

lU/kksy] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0A

&&&&&&&&

In the Court of Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Balh,

District Mandi, H. P.

In the matter of :—

1.

Nitesh Kashyap s/o Shri Akhil Kashyap, r/o Village & P.O. Nagchala, Tehsil Balh,

District Mandi, H.P.

2.

Smt. Seema d/o Shri Lal Singh, r/o Village Chambi, P.O. Padhiun, Tehsil Balh,

District Mandi, H.P. at present wife of Nitesh Kashyap s/o Shri Akhil Kashyap, r/o

Village & P.O. Nagchala, Tehsil Balh, District Mandi, H.P.

. . Applicants

Versus

General Public

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

1954.

Whereas Nitesh Kashyap s/o Shri Akhil Kashyap, r/o Village & P.O. Nagchala, Tehsil

Balh, District Mandi, H.P. and Smt. Seema d/o Shri Lal Singh, r/o Village Chambi, P.O. Padhiun,

Tehsil Balh, District Mandi, H.P. at present wife of Nitesh Kashyap s/o Shri Akhil Kashyap, r/o

Village & P.O. Nagchala, Tehsil Balh, District Mandi, H.P. have filed an application along with

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

solemnized their marriage on 05-02-2016 according to Hindu rites and customs at Village & P.O.

Nagchala, Tehsil Balh, District Mandi H.P. and they are living together as husband and wife since

then. Hence, their marriage may be registered under Special Marriage Act, 1954.

3979

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

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

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

court on or before 28-07-2017. After that no objection will be entertained and marriage will be

registered.

Issued today on 28^th day of June, 2017 under my hand and seal of the court.

Seal.

Sd/-

Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate,

Balh, District Mandi (H.P.).

___________

c vnkyr Jh osn izdk'k] lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh] lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0

'kh"kZd %

nh lqUnjuxj] rglhy dks0 vks0 ,e0 ,.M lh0 ;wfu;u fy0 lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0

ctfj;k lfpo vkse izdk'k iq= Jh equh yky] fuoklh Hkkstiqj] rglhy lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0

- - izkFkhZA

cuke

vke turk

- - izR;kFkhZx.kA

izkFkZuk i= okD;k egky Hkkstiqj] rglhy lqUnjuxj ds dkxtkr eky esa uke dh n#Lr djus ckjsA

nh lqUnjuxj] rglhy dks0 vks0 ,e0 ,.M lh0 ;wfu;u fy0 lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0

ctfj;k lfpo vkse izdk'k iq= Jh equh yky] fuoklh Hkkstiqj] rglhy lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0 us

bl U;k;ky; esa vkosnu i= izLrqr fd;k gS fd Hkwfe [ksoV uEcj 195] [krkSuh uEcj 378] [kljk uEcj

1273] 1274] jdck rknknh 528-05 oxZ ehVj] [ksoV uEcj 469] [krkSuh uEcj 727] [kljk uEcj 1264]

1271] 1272 jDck rknknh 371-77 oxZ ehVj o [ksoV uEcj 397] [krkSuh uEcj 639] [kljk uEcj 1262]

jDck rknknh 115-88 oxZ ehVj okD;k egky Hkkstiqj] rglhy lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0 esa ntZ gSA

izkFkhZ dk uke nh lqUnjuxj] rglhy dks0 vks0 ,e0 ,.M lh0 ;wfu;u fy0 lqUnjuxj gS o fgUnh esa nh

lqUnjuxj rglhy lgdkjh foi.ku ,oe miHkksDrk la?k lfefr gS ijUrq jktLo vfHkys[k esa O;kikfjd

lgdkjh lfefr] mi&e.My lqUnjuxj ntZ gS] ftls izkFkhZ n#Lr djokuk pkgrk gSA

vr% bl b'rgkj ds ek/;e ls mDr izR;kFkhZx.kksa dks lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd mDr n#Lrh ds

ckjk esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dk dksbZ mtj@,rjkt gks rks og fnukad 27&07&2017 dks eqdjZj rkjh[k ij

coDr 10-00 cts lqcg vlkyru ;k odkyru gkftj vkdj iSjoh eqdíek djsa vU;Fkk vkids f[kykQ

dk;Zokgh ,drjQk vey esa ykbZ tk;sxhA

3980

jkti=] fgekpy izns'k] 17 tqykbZ] 2017@26 vk"kk<+] 1939

vkt fnukad 28&06&2017 dks esjs gLrk{kj o eksgj vnkyr ls tkjh gqvkA

eksgjA

gLrk{kfjr@&]

lgk;d lekgrkZ izFke Js.kh]

lqUnjuxj] ftyk e.Mh] fg0 iz0A

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

bysDVªkWfud gLrk{kfjr jkti=] oSclkbV http://rajpatrahimachal.nic.in ij miyC/k gS ,oe~ vkWuykbu lR;kfir fd;k tk ldrk gS