Himachal Pradesh Gazette, No. 253, 22 February 2020

click here for IIIF manifest

राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश हिमाचल प्रदेश राज्य शासन द्वारा प्रकाशित शनिवार, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941

हिमाचल प्रदेश सरकार

गृह विभाग

अधिसूचना

शिमला-2, 31 अगस्त, 2019

संख्या गृह (सी) एफ (14)-2/2014.--हिमाचल प्रदेश के राज्यपाल, युद्धाभ्यास और खुले क्षेत्र में गोला चलाने तथा तोप दागने का अभ्यास अधिनियम, 1938 (1938 का 5) की धारा 9 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शाक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, नीचे दी गयी अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट क्षेत्र को ऐसा क्षेत्र परिनिश्चित करती है, जिसमें प्रथम सितम्बर, 2019 से 31 अगस्त, 2024 तक पांच वर्ष की अवधि के लिए कालिकतरू खुले क्षेत्र में गोला चलाने तथा तोप दागने का अभ्यास करना प्राधि—त किया जायेगा :-

253-राजपत्र/2020-22-02-2020 (10745)10746 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 अनुसूची

(युद्धाभ्यास, खुले क्षेत्र में गोला चलाने और तोप दागने का क्षेत्र)

यह अधिसूचना निम्नलिखित निबन्धों और शर्तों के अध्यधीन जारी की जाती है :-

1. गोला चलाने के अभ्यास को अप्रैल और नवम्बर मास में बुआई करने के समय के दौरान रोकना होगा ।

2. गोला चलाने के अभ्यास को सप्ताह में केवल चार दिन अर्थात्‌ सोमवार, मंगलवार, वीरवार और शुक्रवार के लिए ही सीमित रखना होगा ।

3. सेना प्राधिकारियों को, पच्छाद और नाहन तहसील के लिए प्रमाणित क्षेत्र के गांववासियों के विवाह समारोहों और अन्य महत्त्वपूर्ण समारोहों, जो विहित अवधि के दौरान होते हैं, की दशा में आवश्यक परिवर्तन करने होंगे ।

4. सेना प्राधिकारियों द्वारा, किसी सेना अधिकारियों के नियन्त्रणाधीन, एक नियन्त्रण कक्ष स्थापित किया जायेगा जो सेना के साथ बेहतर समन्वय के लिए स्थानीय निवासियों से संपर्क रखेगा।

आदेश द्वारा, हस्ताक्षरित/- अतिरिक्त मुख्य सचिव (गृह)।

---------

उपाबन्ध-क तहसील नाहन के सम्बद्ध में नारायणगढ़ गोला चलाने के क्षेत्र के लिए अधिसूचना के विस्तारण के लिए भूमि का ब्योरा ।

उपाबन्ध- ख

10748 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 नोट.--उप सम्पदा कनलोग का बंदोबस्त हो चुका है। तथा रकबा वर्ग मीटर में दर्शाया गया है इसको नीचे बीघा/बिस्वा में दर्शाया गया है।

---------

[Authoritative English text of this Department Notification No. Home-(C) F(14) 2/2014 dated

31-8-2019 as required under clause (3) of the Article 348 of the Constitution of India].

HOME DEPARTMENT

(C-SECTION)

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-2, the 31st August, 2019

No. Home-(C)F(14)2/2014.—In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) section 9 of Maneuvers, Field Firing and Artillery Practice Act, 1938 (5 of 1938), the Governor of Himachal Pradesh, is pleased to define the area specified in schedule given below, as an area within which, for period of 5 year from Ist September, 2019 to 31st August, 2024 for periodically carrying out of field Firing & Artillery Practice shall be authorized.

SCHEUDULE

(Maneuvers, Field Firing, and Artillery Range)

This notification is issued subject to following terms and condition:—

1. Firing practice to be stopped during sowing season in the month of April and November.

2. Firing practice to be limited for only 4 days a week namely Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.

3. Army, authorities has to make necessary change in case of marriage functions and other important functions of the villagers of affected area of Pachhad and Nahan Tehsil which fall during the prescribed period of firing practice.

4. Control Room will be set up by the Army authorities under control of an Army Officer who will liaison with the local residents for better co-ordination with the army.

By order, Sd/- Addl. Chief Secretary (Home).

Detail of land for extension of notification for Naraingarh Field Firing Range in respect of

Tehsil Nahan

ANNEXURE-B

Note.—Consolidation of upsampda Kanlog has been done and area which has been shown in square meter. It is shown in Bighas-Biswas below the entries.

___________

LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Dated, the 2nd January, 2020

No. Shram(A) 6-7/2019 (Awards) L.C. Shimla.—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 Shimla on the website of the Department of Labour & Employment Government of Himachal Pradesh:—

By order,

Nisha Singh, IAS, Addl.Chief Secretary (Lab. & Emp.) .

__________

IN THE COURT OF SH. CHIRAG BHANU SINGH, PRESIDING JUDGE, H.P.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, SHIMLA

Reference No. 25 of 2016 Instituted on 22-3-2016 Decided on 27-8-2019

Dinesh Kumar s/o Shri Darshan Lal, r/o Village Nikuwal P.O. Rajpura, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan (H.P.) Through: Shri J.C. Bhardwaj, President H.P. AITUC, Saproon, Solan (H.P.).

..Petitioner.

Versus

M/s Indo Farm Equipment Limited, EPIP, Phase-II, Village Thana P.O. Baddi, District ..Respondent. Solan (H.P.). Through its Factory Manager/Occupier.

Reference under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act

For petitioner : Shri J.C Bhardwaj, AR For respondent : Shri H.R Thakur, Advocate

AWARD

The following reference was received for adjudication from the appropriate Government:—

"Whether the termination of the services of Shri Dinesh Kumar s/o Shri Darshan Lal,

r/o Village Nikuwal, P.O. Rajpura, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. Pin-174101

on account of his transfer vide letter dated 03.10.2013 by the General Manager, M/s

Indo Farm Equipment Ltd., EPIP Phase-II, Village Thana Baddi, District Solan, H.P.

during October, 2013, is legal and justified? If not, what amount of back wages,

seniority, past service benefits and amount of compensation the above aggrieved

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

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he came to be appointed as a mechanic with the respondent on 3.8.2009 and was confirmed as such on 3.8.2011. He continued working as such till his illegal termination on 6.2.2014 that too during the pendency of the order of reference. The respondent had not sought any express permission under section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act).

3. The action of the respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner was a conspiracy designed to oust the petitioner from the employment as he was an active trade unionist and also the member of the Indo Farm Equipment Workers Union (Registered). The respondent management never implemented their own settlement dated 15.2.2014, arrived interse the union and the management whereby the petitioner had been absolved from all the previous disciplinary proceedings and allowed to continue at Baddi. He continuously worked there till 10.7.2014 when he was again transferred to Pipli (Kurukshetra). The petitioner had made a representation on account of the said transfer on 19.7.2014 as he was suffering recurrent chest pain and a medical certificate had been submitted in this behalf to the respondent. He was illegally restrained from attending his duties even on 11.7.2014 and instead of deciding the representation made by the petitioner regarding his transfer, he was served with the notice dated 5.8.2014 alleging absenteeism from duty. The petitioner was not allowed to enter the factory premises after 10.7.2014. On 9.9.2014, the management had further alleged that the petitioner was absconding from duties despite his representation dated 19.7.2014 against his transfer to Pipli. The petitioner had been illegally restrained from attending his duties as per the settlement dated 15.2.2014 which amounts to oral termination. The petitioner again made a representation on 18.9.2014 seeking permission to resume duties, but to no avail. The removal of the petitioner from service is duly covered under section 2-oo of the Act. His transfer to Pipli was also beyond the terms of the Certified Standing Orders and the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948. The removal of the petitioner has been ordered against the provisions of section 25-N of the Act and the impugned oral order dated 26.7.2014 dispensing with the services of the petitioner is not only voilative of the provisions of the Act but even articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

4. The petitioner thus prays that his termination be declared illegal null and void. He may be re-engaged with all consequential benefits including back-wages.

5. While controverting the allegations so made, the respondents have inter-alia raised preliminary objections vis-a-vis estoppel and concealment of material facts. It is averred by the respondent that the services of the petitioner have never been terminated, it is he who is absenting himself from duty. The petitioner having himself abandoned job the present petition is not maintainable.

6. On merits, it is the contention of the respondent that the previous conduct of the petitioner shows that he was a habitual absentee from duty. Even earlier he had been transferred from Baddi to Uttar Pradesh in exigency of work on 3.10.2013, in view of clause-II of the10753 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 appointment letter dated 3.8.2009 and the certified standing orders of the company. The petitioner even at that time had refused to receive the transfer order sent to him through registered post. A formal show cause was issued to him on 12.11.2013 and after conducting a fair, proper and legal domestic enquiry, the services of the petitioner have been terminated vide letter dated 6.2.2014. A strike was resorted in the interregnum however due to the intervention of the Conciliation Officer, a settlement was arrived at and the respondent has agreed to revoke the termination of the petitioner. After the revocation of the termination, the petitioner was posted at Baddi vide a letter dated 16.2.2014.

7. However, as per the respondent, the out-let at Baddi was closed due to circumstances beyond the control of the management and as such the petitioner was re-appointed at nearest out-let of the company at Pipli Kurukhetra vide a letter dated 10.7.2014 along-with an increase of Rs. 2000/- per month. The petitioner however failed to report for duty at the place of his posting. The petitioner was requested through registered letters dated 9.7.2014, 5.8.2014, 25.9.2014 and 22.11.2014 to report for duty, but, to no avail. The petitioner had raised a plea that he was unable to join as he was suffering from chest pain. He was however advised to get checked up from the Government/ESI hospital and submitted the relevant documents to management but he never reported back. The petitioner time and again requested to join the duties but he failed to do so. The management is still ready to take the workman on duty but without back-wages and consequential benefits if he joined at Pipli. It is denied that any show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner after 26.7.2014. The respondent thus prays that the petition be dismissed being devoid of any merits.

8. While filing rejoinder, the petitioner controverted the averments in the reply filed by respondent and further reiterated those in the statement of claim.

9. I notice that on 27.6.2014, the following issues came to be framed by my Learned Predecessor:

1. Whether the termination of the services of the petitioner on 03.10.2013 without complying with the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is illegal and ..OPP. unjustified?

2. If Issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, to what relief of service benefits the petitioner is ..OPR.

entitled?

3. Whether the petition is not maintainable, as allege?

..OPR.

4. Relief:

10. Having considered the pleadings, evidence and other attendant material placed on record, my findings on the issues framed are thus: —

Issue No. 1 : Yes.

Issue No. 2 : Entitled to reinstatement in service with seniority and continuity but without any back-wages.

Issue No. 3 : No.

Relief : Reference is answered partly in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent per operative part of award.

Issues No. 1 & 2 :

11. Both these issues being correlated and intermingled are being taken up together for decision.

12. Though, the petitioner claims that his services have been illegally terminated after 26.7.2014 being in stark contravention of the provisions of the Act, whereas per the respondent the petitioner had willfully abandoned the job as he did not join his place of posting i.e. Pipli (Kurukshtera) where he had been repositioned vide letter dated 10.7.2014.

13. The genesis giving rise to this situation as pleaded by the respondent themselves is that on 30.10.2013, the petitioner had been transferred from Baddi to Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner had refused to receive the transfer orders, though, all possible endeavor has been made to serve him through registered post vide letters dated 8.11.2013 and 26.10.2013. Eventually, he was proceeded departmentally and terminated vide letter dated 6.2.2014. In the mean time a strike was resorted to by the workers in December 2013 and due to the intervention of the Conciliation Officer, Baddi a settlement was arrived at between the respondent and the workers on 5.2.2014 (Ex. PW-1/C) wherein the termination of the petitioner was revoked and it was agreed that he would be retained at Baddi.

14. In pursuance to the settlement the petitioner came to be adjusted and posted at Baddi on 6.2.2014. As per the respondent the out-let at Baddi was closed due to circumstance beyond the control of management and as such the petitioner was reposted at the nearest out-let of the company at Pipli (Kurukhetra) vide letter dated 10.7.2014 and increase of Rs. 2000/- was also granted to him. However, the petitioner failed to report for duty at the new place of posting. Again registered communications sent to the petitioner on 5.8.2014, 9.9.2014, 25.9.2014 and 22.11.2014 but he did not report for duty. The petitioner had though expressed his inability to join because of some chest ailment and the respondent had advised him to get check- up from the Government hospital or ESI hospital vide letter dated 25.9.2014, but, the petitioner never reported to the management. Per the respondent the services of the petitioner have never been terminated but he remained absent from duty without intimation. The management is still ready to take the petitioner on duty though without back-wages, if he joins at Pipli, Kurukshetra.

15. To substantiate their respective claims the petitioner has appeared as his own witness as PW-1 while one Shri Chattar Singh, Manager (HR) of respondent company has appeared as RW-1.

16. What transpires from the conjoint reading of the deposition of the two witnesses is that the petitioner had been ordered to be transferred on 10.7.2014 to Pipli in Kurukshetra. Admittedly, he had not joined at the new place of posting, but, the fact remains that no action was initiated by the respondent against the petitioner for willful absence from duty. No show cause or administrative action was initiated against the petitioner. Though, vide a letter dated 9th September, 2014 (Ex. PW-1/J) the respondent had expressed its intention to take disciplinary action if he fails to join within 48 hours, but beyond that seemingly no action was taken. The affidavit of RW-1 also does not show that any action was taken in pursuance to Ex.PW-1/J. In fact, he has even admitted in his cross-examination that no enquiry was initiated against the petitioner for unauthorized absence. Abandonment also has not been proved by the respondent by leading any evidence on that score.

17. The perusal of Ex. PW-1/C, the settlement arrived interse the workers and the management on 15.2.2014, also happens to have been entered into because of the transfer of about six employees to different parts of the country including Maharashtra and Utter Pradesh. As per the settlement the management had agreed to adjust one Tarsem Lal and Naresh Kumar, who had been transferred to Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra respectively in Punjab and Haryana. The petitioner Dinesh Kumar had agreed to adjust at Baddi while one Tarun Dogra was adjusted in Punjab and likewise Kuldeep Singh in Pinjore and Sohan Singh in Ambala respectively. It is in pursuance to the settlement that apparently the petitioner came to be posted at Baddi vide letter dated 16.2.2014, however, on 10.7.2014 the petitioner was again transferred to Pipli in Kurukshtra.

18. As per the pleaded case of the respondent the petitioner had been transferred to Pipli as the out-let at Baddi was closed due to the circumstances beyond the control of the management, but, strangely RW-1 does not know this. There is not a whisper in his deposition that the transfer of the petitioner was necessary because of the closure of one out-let at baddi. The transfer thus also does not seem bonafide, more particularly, keeping in view the settlement Ex. PW-1/C.

19. The respondent had also not taken any steps by issuing any show cause or initiating any enquiry for the so called unauthorized absence from duty. Had it been so, the respondent could have dispensed with the services of the petitioner after following the due process of law. Had it been a case of closuer the respondent could have fallen back on the statutory provisions of the Act and done away with the services of the petitioner and in case it was unauthorized absence or abandonment the respondent should have issued a show cause for his unauthorized absence and taken necessary steps as a sequel thereto, however, no such steps were taken by the respondent. Even otherwise the other similar situated persons who have approached this Court against their termination have seen been ordered to be re-engaged, though without back-wages. The contention of the respondent that the petitioner was transferred out of Baddi as the out-let at Baddi was closed is also falsified by Ex. RW-1E, which clearly shows that the petitioner after his earlier reinstatement in pursuance to the settlement Ex. PW-1/C whereby the petitioner had been directed to join duties in servicing department at Baddi. The bonafidies of the respondent thus are doubtful vis-a-vis the transfer so affected by them on 10.7.2014.

20. For all the reasons discussed and detailed hereinabove the action of the respondent in tacitly doing away with the services of the petitioner is held violative of the provisions of the Act, as it tantamount to "retrenchment". Admittedly, no notice and compensation had been paid to the petitioner. Consequently, while answering the issues in favour of the petitioner the respondent is directed to re-engage the petitioner forth-with at the same place and post where he was working at Baddi. Seeing to the peculiar circumstances on record the petitioner is not entitled to any back- wages, though, he shall be entitled to seniority and continuity in service. The issues are thus decided accordingly.

Issue No.3:

21. Nothing has been brought to my notice as to how the petition is not maintainable. Even otherwise for all the reasons recorded while answering issues No. 1&2, it is more than apparent that the claim is maintainable. The issue is thus decided against the respondent.

RELIEF:

For the foregoing reasons discussed hereinabove supra, the reference is partly allowed. The termination of the petitioner is quashed and set aside. The respondent is directed to re-engage the petitioner at the same place and post where he was working at Baddi. Seeing to the peculiar circumstances on record the petitioner is not entitled to any back-wages, though, he shall be entitled10756 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 to seniority and continuity in service. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government for publication in the official gazette. File, after completion, be consigned to records.

Announced in the open Court today this 27th Day of August, 2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Sh. Suraj Kajur

V/s

The General Manager-HOP, HPPCL Reckong peo and Ors.

01-08-2019

Present: None for petitioner. Sh. Manoj Chauhan, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 1 Sh. Naresh Sharma, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 2 & 3

Notices issued to the petitioner have been received back after services. As per the tracking report of the postal department the notices stand delivered. The petitioner thus has been duly served for today. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. It thus seems that the Industrial Dispute under reference is no longer in existence and the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as not having been pressed, at this stage. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette. Be consigned to records after completion.

Announced 01.08.2019

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Sh. Nabin Shah

V/s

The General Manager-HOP, HPPCL Reckong peo and Ors.

01.08.2019

Present: None for petitioner. Sh. Manoj Chauhan, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 110757 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 Sh. Naresh Sharma, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 2 & 3 Notices issued to the petitioner have been received back after services. As per the tracking report of the postal department the notices stand delivered. The petitioner thus has been duly served for today. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. It thus seems that the Industrial Dispute under reference is no longer in existence and the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as not having been pressed, at this stage. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette. Be consigned to records after completion.

Announced 01.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Sh. Bhupender Rokha

V/s

The General Manager-HOP, HPPCL Reckong Peo and Ors.

01.08.2019 Present: None for petitioner. Sh. Manoj Chauhan, Ld. Csl. for respondent No.-1. Sh. Naresh Sharma, Ld. Csl. for respondent No.-2 & 3

Notices issued to the petitioner have been received back after services. As per the tracking report of the postal department the notices stand delivered. The petitioner thus has been duly served for today. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. It thus seems that the Industrial Dispute under reference is no longer in existence and the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as not having been pressed, at this stage. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette. Be consigned to records after completion.

Announced 01.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Smt. Soniya Kumari

V/s

The General Manager-HOP, HPPCL Reckong Peo and Ors.

01.08.2019 Present: None for petitioner. Sh. Manoj Chauhan, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 1 Sh. Naresh Sharma, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 2 & 3

Notices issued to the petitioner have been received back after services. As per the tracking report of the postal department the notices stand delivered. The petitioner thus has been duly served for today. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. It thus seems that the Industrial Dispute under reference is no longer in existence and the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as not having been pressed, at this stage. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette. Be consigned to records after completion.

Announced 01.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Feroz Khan

Vs.

Zee Laboratory

22.08.2019. Present: Petitioner in person Sh. J.P. Singh, AR for respondent

The petitioner is present in person. With the able assistance of the respondent, the matter has been amicably settled. The respondent has agreed to pay a lum-sum-amount of Rs. 65,000/- as full and final settlement of the claim. The petitioner is also not averse to the said proposal. The respondent has paid an amount of Rs. 65,000/- today in court itself. A separate statement of the petitioner in this behalf has been recorded and placed on record. As a sequel thereto, the reference is disposed off as having become in fructuous in view of the compromise. The dispute referred to this court stands amicably resolved, nothing more subsists to be decided any further. Disposed off in the aforesaid terms. Let, a copy of this order be sent to appropriate government for publication in the official gazette. File, after completion be consigned to records.

Announced 22.08.2019

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

Vs.

MS IGMC Hospital & ors.

23.08.2019. Present: None for petitioner. Ms. Reena Chauhan, Ld. DDA for respondent No. 1 Sh. Kuldeep Guleris, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 2 Sh. Sandeep Mahajan, Ld. Csl. for respondent No. 3 None for respondent No. 4 Sh. Pawan Thakur, Ld. vice Csl. for respondent No. 5

Despite repeated opportunities none has appeared on the behalf of the petitioner. In fact none appeared on behalf of petitioner on 03.07.2019, 07.08.2019 and even today. The demands have been raised by Samast Safai Karamchari Union, neither the representative of the trade union nor any counsel has appeared on the last three dates. Seemingly, the petitioners are not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The absence of the petitioners and their counsel is suggestive of the fact that the Industrial Dispute has lost its relevance. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed at this stage. Ordered accordingly. Let, a copy of this coder be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette. Be consigned to records, after completion.

Announced 23.08.2019

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Ref. 140/2018

Ramesh Kumar

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication:

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Ramesh Kumar s/o Sh. Jaggu Ram, Village Shari Wala, P.O. Trilokpur, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. by the Occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex- worker is entitled to from the above employer/ management?"10760 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmour and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Pinki Saini

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Pinki Saini s/o Sh. Shubh Karan, Village Nanhera, P.O. Barsu Majra Narain Garh, District Ambala, Haryana by the Occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmour, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed10761 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Sh. Deep Chand

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication. "Whether termination of services of Sh. Deep Chand s/o Sh. Rameshwar Dass, Village Nanhera, P.O. Barsu Majra, Tehsil Narain Garh, District Ambala, Haryana by the Occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmour, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Santosh Pal s/o Sh. Nand Jee, Village Shari Wala, P.O. Trilokpur, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. by the occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmour, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Raj Pal

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Raj Pal s/o Sh. Gian Chand , Village Shari Wala, P.O. Trilokpur, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. by the occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Soran Singh

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Soran Singh s/o Sh. Layak Ram, Village Andheri, P.O. Palion, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. by the occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank".

The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Sh. Surat Ram

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29. 08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Surat Ram s/o Sh. Nahiya Ram, Village-Devani, P.O. Mogi Nand, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. by the occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala- Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Karam Bir Singh s/o Sh. Kehar Singh, Village- Milak, P.O. Rasulpur, Tehsil Sadaura, District Yamuna Nagar, Haryana by the Occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?"

Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

Tej Ram

V/s

M/s Knight Queen Company Pvt. Ltd. Kala-Amb

29.08.2019 Present: None for parties.

The following reference had been received by this court for adjudication.

"Whether termination of services of Sh. Tej Pal s/o Sh. Kreshan Lal, VPO Palion, Tehsil Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. by the Occupier Pvt. Ltd., Village Kheri, P.O. Trilokpur Road, Kala10766 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 Amb, Tehsil Nahan, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P., w.e.f. 05.07.2017 without complying with the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act 1947, as alleged by workman, is legal and justified? If not, what relief including reinstatement, amount of back wages, seniority, past services benefits and compensation the above ex-worker is entitled to from the above employer/management?" Since 02.08.2018 numerous efforts had been made by this court to serve the petitioner, but to no avail. Despite notices having been served through the agency of the Ld. Civil Judge-cum- CJM, Sirmaur and even through registered post on two different occasions, the petitioner is not forth coming. Once, when the notices were issued through the process serving agency of the court, report had been received on 09.04.2019 "that the company had been sealed by the Central Bank". The petitioner on the other hand has been served twice, but none has appeared. It seems that the Industrial Dispute, so raised has ceased to exist and as such the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the lis any further. The reference is thus dismissed as having not being pressed. Disposed off accordingly. Let a copy of this order be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette.

Announced 29.08.2019.

Sd/- (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH), Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla.

_________

TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT

NOTIFICATION

Shimla-2, the 17th February, 2020

No. TPT-F(5)-4/2019.—The Governor of Himachal Pradesh, as per the provisions of Article 31(B) of the Articles of Association of Ropeway and Rapid Transport System Development Corporation is pleased to nominate the following Officers as Directors in the Board of Ropeway and Rapid Transport System Development Corporation Ltd. [by replacing the first Directors by name] of the Company, with immediate effect:—

1. Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh .. Chairman 2. ACS/Pr. Secretary/ Secretary (PW)

.. Director 3. ACS/Pr. Secretary/ Secretary (Finance)

.. Director 4. ACS/Pr. Secretary/ Secretary (Forest)

.. Director 5. ACS/Pr. Secretary/ Secretary (Urban Development) .. Director 6. ACS/Pr. Secretary/ Secretary (Transport)

.. Director 7. Commissioner (Director), Transport

.. Director

By order,

J.C. SHARMA, Principal Secretary (Transport).

NOTIFICATION

Dated : the 31st January, 2020

No. CBA-Peshi-M-47(6)/2018.—Whereas, the General Manager (incharge) Baira Siul Power Station (NHPC) Surangani Distt. Chamba H.P. vide his office letter No. LAO/BSP/ Surangani-G (1)/17/431 dated 18-09-2019 has intimated that the Baloo Bridge was constructed 40 years ago and technically it is now unfit for plying the heavy vehicles and if the heavy vehicles are continued to ply over the said bridge as a result of which there is possibility that some accident may occur and the responsibility of the same could be fixed upon the Baira Siul project Authority as well as administration.

Therefore, he has resquested that the restriction to ply the heavy vehicles over the Baloo bridge may be imposed so as to avaid any untoward incidents and only Light Motor Vehicles may be allowed to ply over the said bridge.

Hence, keeping in view the above facts and to ensure safety of life and property, I, Vivek Bhatia, IAS, District Magistrate Chamba, in exercise of the powers vested in me under section 115 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and all other powers enabling me in this behalf, do hereby notify as under :—

1. That no heavy vehicle i.e. bus (private as well as HRTC bus) and truck etc. shall be allowed to ply/cross over Baloo Bridge(from both sides).

2. That all the heavy vehicles i.e. buses (private as well as HRTC buses), trucks, tractors etc. shall route via newly constructed bridge near Baloo (to and fro).

3. That only Light Motor Vehicles and Two wheeler shall allowed to be plied over the (old) Steel Truss Bridge at Balloo (to and fro).

These regulations shall come into effect from 31st January, 2020 and shall remain in force till further order.

By order, Sd/- (VIVEK BHATIA), District Magistrate, Chamba, District Chamba (H.P.).

__________

ब अदालत सहायक समाहर्ता द्वितीय श्रेणी एवं नायब तहसीलदार, भूव्यवस्था द्वितीय वृत्त हमीरपुर, स्थित दोसड़का, तहसील व जिला हमीरपुर (हि0प्र0)

श्री रूपलाल पुत्र दुन्गा, निवासी गांव चमनेड़, मौजा उगयालता, तहसील व जिला हमीरपुर, (हि0प्र0) विषय.--प्रार्थना-पत्र सेहतनाम बारे।

उपरोक्त प्रार्थी ने अधोहस्ताक्षरी की अदालत में प्रार्थना-पत्र ब्यान हल्फी व अन्य दस्तावेज इस आशय से गुजार कर निवेदन किया है कि मेरा सही नाम रूपलाल है परन्तु महाल चमनेड़, मौजा उगयालता के राजस्व अभिलेख में रूप चन्द गलत दर्ज हुआ है जिसकी दुरुस्ती की जावे इत्यादि। 10768 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 इस सम्बन्ध में सर्वसाधारण को वजरिया इश्तहार सूचित किया जाता है कि प्रार्थी के नाम दुरुस्ती बारे किसी को उजर/एतराज हो तो वह असालतन या वकालतन अदालत अधोहस्ताक्षरी में दिनांक 24-02-2020 को हाजिर आकर अपना एतराज दर्ज करवा सकता है कोई उजर/एतराज न आने की सूरत में एकतरफा कार्यवाही अमल में लाई जाकर के नाम दुरुस्ती के आदेश दे दिए जाएंगे।

आज दिनांक 20-01-2020 को मेरे हस्ताक्षर व अदालत मोहर से जारी हुआ।

मोहर।

हस्ताक्षरित/- सहायक समाहर्ता द्वितीय श्रेणी एवं नायब तहसीलदार, भूव्यवस्था द्वितीय वृत्त हमाीरपुर, स्थित दोसड़का, तहसील व जिला हमीरपुर (हि0प्र0)।

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

In the Court of Dr. Charanji Lal, HPAS, Marriage Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate,

Hamirpur, District Hamirpur (H.P.)

In the matter of :

1. Sh. Surinder Kumar Sohal s/o Sh. Prem Chand, r/o Village Dadoh, Post Office Galore, Tehsil Nadaun, District Hamirpur (H.P.) at present residing in the House of Sh. Raj Kumar s/o Sh. Dhani Ram, r/o House No. 290, Ward No. 1, Krishan Nagar, Tehsil & District Hamirpur (H.P.).

2. Smt. Maya Devi d/o Sh. Karam Chand, r/o Village Fagla, Post Office Jarol, Tehsil . .Applicants. Sundernagar, District Mandi (H.P.)

Versus

General Public

Subject.— Notice for Registration of Marriage.

Sh. Surinder Kumar and Smt. Maya Devi have filed an application U/S 15 of Special Marriage Act, 1954 alongwith affidavits and supporting documents in the court of the undersigned stating therein that they have solemnized their marriage on 07-02-2020 as per Hindu ritual and customs.

Therefore, the general public is hereby informed through this notice that any person who has any objection regarding this marriage can file his/her objections personally or in writing before this court on or before 23-03-2020. In case no objection is received by 23-03-2020 it will be presumed that there is no objection to the registration of the above said marriage and the same will be registered accordingly.

Issued today under my hand and seal of the court on 10-02-2020

Seal.

Sd/-

Marriage Officer-cum-SDM,

Sub-Division Hamirpur,

District Hamirpur (H.P.).

ब अदालत सहायक समाहर्ता द्वितीय श्रेणी, डाडा सीबा, जिला कांगड़ा (हि0 प्र0)

श्री यशपाल पुत्र श्री मोती राम पुत्र साईदास, वासी महाल जम्बल, तहसील डाडा सीबा, जिला कांगड़ा . . प्रार्थी। (हि0 प्र0)

बनाम

. . प्रत्यार्थीगण। आम जनता

उनवान मुकद्दमा.--प्रार्थना-पत्र बाबत दुरुस्ती नाम कागजात माल महाल जम्बल, तहसील डाडा सीबा, जिला कांगड़ा (हि0 प्र0)।

श्री यशपाल पुत्र श्री मोती राम पुत्र साईदास, वासी महाल जम्बल, तहसील डाडा सीबा, जिला कांगड़ा (हि0 प्र0) ने अदालत हजा में प्रार्थना-पत्र दिया है कि उसका सही नाम आधार कार्ड, पंचायत रिकार्ड व स्कूल रिकार्ड में यशपाल पुत्र श्री मोती राम दर्ज है जबकि राजस्व रिकार्ड महाल जम्बल में उसका नाम रछपाल सिंह पुत्र मोती राम दर्ज है जो सही न है प्रार्थी ने उपरोक्त नाम की दुरुस्ती करवाने बारे अनुरोध किया है। अतः उपरोक्त नाम दुरुस्ती बारे सर्वसाधारण आम जनता को इस इश्तहार द्वारा सूचित किया जाता है कि यदि किसी व्यक्ति को उक्त दुरुस्ती बारे कोई उजर/एतराज हो तो वह दिनांक 26-02-2020 को प्रातः 10.00 बजे इस मुकद्दमा की पैरवी हेतु व्यक्तिगत रूप से अथवा किसी अधिकृत एजैन्ट के माध्यम से या किसी अधिवक्ता के माध्यम से इस न्यायालय में उपस्थित आवें। गैरहाजिरी की सूरत में नाम दुरुस्त करने हेतु आदेश पारित कर दिये जायेंगे। बाद मियाद तारीख पेशी कोई उजर/एतराज काबिले गौर न होगा।

आज दिनांक 11-02-2020 को मेरे हस्ताक्षर व मोहर न्यायालय द्वारा जारी किया गया।

मोहर।

हस्ताक्षरित/- सहायक समाहर्ता द्वितीय श्रेणी, डाडा सीबा, जिला कांगड़ा (हि0 प्र0)।10770 राजपत्र, हिमाचल प्रदेश, 22 फरवरी, 2020/3 फाल्गुन, 1941 नियन्त्रक, मुद्रण तथा लेखन सामग्री, हिमाचल प्रदेश, शिमला-5 द्वारा मुद्रित तथा प्रकाशित इलेक्ट्रॉनिक हस्ताक्षरित राजपत्र, वैबसाइट http://rajpatrahimachal.nic.in पर उपलब्ध है एवम्‌ ऑनलाइन सत्यापित किया जा सकता है