Panaji, 31st August, 2017 (Bhadra 9, 1939)
SERIES II No. 22
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
Suggestions are welcomed on e-mail: [email protected]
1453
RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410
Reg. No. G-2/RNP/GOA/32/2015-2017
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
Department of Finance
Revenue & Control Division
__
Notification
No. 4/5/2005-Fin(R&C)/2929
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (a)
of sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Goa Value
Added Tax Act, 2005 (Goa Act No. 9 of 2005)
(hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), the
Government of Goa hereby appoints the person
mentioned in column (2) of the Schedule herein
below (hereinafter referred to as the “said
Schedule”) as Additional Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes, for carrying out the purposes of
the said Act, with effect from the date of their
joining the post as specified in the corresponding
entry in column (3) of the Schedule below:
SCHEDULE
Sr.
Name of the officer
Date of joining
No.
the post
1
2
3
1.
Shri Ashok V. Rane
29-03-2017.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Sushama D. Kamat, Under Secretary, Finance
(R&C).
Porvorim, 22nd August, 2017.
Notification
No. 4/5/2005-Fin(R&C)/2930
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (a)
of sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Goa Value
Added Tax Act, 2005 (Goa Act No. 9 of 2005)
(hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), the
Government of Goa hereby appoints the person
mentioned in column (2) of the Schedule herein
below (hereinafter referred to as the “said
Schedule”) as Commercial Tax Officer, for carrying
out the purposes of the said Act, with effect from
the date of their joining the post as specified in the
corresponding entry in column (3) of the Schedule
below:
SCHEDULE
Sr.
Name of the officer
Date of joining
No.
the post
1
2
3
1.
Shri Gaurish V. Khedekar
12-07-2016.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Sushama D. Kamat, Under Secretary, Finance
(R&C).
Porvorim, 22nd August, 2017.
________
Notification
No. 4/5/2005-Fin(R&C)/2931
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (a)
of sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Goa Value
Added Tax Act, 2005 (Goa Act No. 9 of 2005)
(hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), the
Government of Goa hereby appoints the person
mentioned in column (2) of the Schedule herein
below (hereinafter referred to as the “said
Schedule”) as the Commercial Tax Inspector, for
carrying out the purposes of the said Act, with
effect from the date of their joining the post as
Note:-
There are two Extraordinary issues to the
Official Gazette, Series II No. 21 dated 24-08-2017
as follows:—
(1) Extraordinary dated 28-08-2017 from pages
1449 to 1450 regarding Notification from
Department of Elections.
(2) Extraordinary (No. 2) dated 29-08-2017 from
pages 1451 to 1452 regarding Notification from
Department of Commercial Taxes.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1454
specified in the corresponding entry in column (3)
of the Schedule below:
SCHEDULE
Sr.
Name of the officer
Date of joining
No.
the post
1
2
3
1.
Shri Ramnath D. Gawas
29-06-2016.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Sushama D. Kamat, Under Secretary, Finance
(R&C).
Porvorim, 22nd August, 2017.
________
Notification
No. 4/5/2005-Fin(R&C)/2932
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (a)
of sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Goa Value
Added Tax Act, 2005 (Goa Act No. 9 of 2005)
(hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), the
Government of Goa hereby appoints the persons
mentioned in column (2) of the Schedule herein
below (hereinafter referred to as the “said
Schedule”) as Assistant Commissioners of
Commercial Taxes, for carrying out the purposes of
the said Act, with effect from the date of their
joining the post as specified in the corresponding
entry in column (3) of the Schedule below:
SCHEDULE
Sr.
Name of the officer
Date of joining
No.
the post
1
2
3
1.
Shri Chandresh C. Kunkalkar
28-09-2016.
2.
Smt. Sangeeta M. Porobo
28-09-2016.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Sushama D. Kamat, Under Secretary, Finance
(R&C).
Porvorim, 22nd August, 2017.
———uuu———
Department of Labour
__
Notification
No. 28/9/2017-LAB/Part-I/604
The following award (Part) passed by the
Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa
on 29-06-2017 in reference No. IT/05/94 is hereby
published as required by Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947).
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Georgina Saldanha, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 24th August, 2017.
______
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND LABOUR
COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Vincent D’Silva, Hon’ble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/05/94
Workmen,
Rep. by the President,
Federation of Goa Trade Union,
1st Floor, Mabai Building,
Margao-Goa.
… Workmen/Party I.
V/s
M/s. Dalmia Resorts International
Pvt. Ltd.,
The Old Anchor, Mobor,
Cavelosim-Goa.
… Employer/Party II.
Workmen/Party I, Shri Cruz Fernandes represented
by Shri Subhash Naik Jorge.
Employer/Party II represented by Ld. Adv. Shri P. J.
Kamat.
AWARD (PART)
(Delivered on this the 29th day of the month
of June of the year 2017)
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (d)
of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (for short the Act),
the Government of Goa by order dated 13-10-93
bearing number 28/42/93-LAB has referred the
following dispute for adjudication.
“(1) Whether the action of the management of
M/s. Dalmia Resorts International Pvt. Ltd.
(The Old Anchor), Cavelossim, in dismissing
the following workmen with effect from
15-9-92, is legal and justified?
(1) Shri Cruz Cardozo.
(2) Shri Cruz Fernandes.
(3) Shri Domnic Rodrigues.
(4) Shri Aurelio D’Costa.
(5) Shri Joaquim Mendes.
(6) Shri Paul Cruz.
(7) Shri Joseph Mascarenhas.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1455
If not, to what relief each of the workmen is
entitled?”
2. Upon receipt of the dispute reference No. IT/
/5/94 was registered. Notices were issued to both
the parties under registered post, upon which both
the parties were served. Party I filed a claim
statement at Exb. 3. Party II filed written statement
at Exb. 5. Rejoinder was filed by Party I at Exb. 6.
3. In short, it is the case of Party I/Workmen that
they were initially the members of union by name
“The Old Anchor Dalmia Resorts Employees Union”
which union got affiliated to a Federation of Trade
Union’s i.e. Party I union. It is stated that in or
about Feb., 1992 Party II suspended two of its
employees without any valid reason to which the
employees objected and the Federation gave a
notice to Party II to withdraw the suspension order
failing which they would resort to a strike. It is
stated that Party II did not withdraw the suspension
order and as such employees went on strike from
23-3-92 which lasted for about 18 days and was
later withdrawn due to some understandings
arrived at between Party II and the employees. It
is also stated that Party II issued charge sheets to
41 workmen including Party I workmen during the
period when the employees had gone on strike,
however later decided to withdraw suspensions as
well as charge sheets issued to all the employees,
except 14 workmen and decided to continue
enquires against the said 14 employees.
4. It is also stated that subsequently Party II
took back 7 more employees in service by
withdrawing the suspension orders and dropping
charges but did not withdraw the suspension order
nor dropped the charges against Party I workmen.
It is stated that after completing the enquiry, Party
II terminated the services of Party I workmen. The
charge sheets issued to Party I workmen are totally
false and are issued with a view to victimize them
for participating in the agitation and the strike
called by the union. It is stated that the enquiry
conducted against Party I workmen was in violation
of principles of natural justice and no sufficient
opportunity was given to them to defend
themselves in the enquiry. Thus, it is the case of
Party I that termination of services of Party I
workmen by Party II w.e.f. 15-9-92 is illegal and
unjustified and they are entitled to be reinstated
in service with full back wages and continuity in
service.
5. In the written statement, Party II has raised
objections on the maintainability of the reference
by stating that there is no industrial dispute as
defined in Section 2(k) or Section 2(A) of Industrial
Disputes Act. It is stated that two of the employees
were suspended due to assault on the
representative of Party II and thus they were
suspended. It is stated that being aggrieved by
the said suspension orders, some of the workers
along with others obstructed the managerial,
supervisory and administrative staff so also stopped
the vehicles of guests and threatened and
intimidated them and that the Party I workmen
were also among the said striking workers. It is
stated that Party II issued charge sheets to each of
the employees and they were asked to submit their
explanation and thereafter enquiry was held
against each workmen individually. It is stated that
the enquiry was conducted by following the
principles of natural justice and the workmen were
given full opportunity to defend themselves in the
enquiry and that on completion of the enquiry, the
Enquiry Officer submitted his findings holding the
workmen guilty of the charges leveled against them
and pursuant to that, Party II dismissed the
workmen from service.
6. In the rejoinder, Party I has denied the case
set up by Party II in the written statement.
7. In the course of further proceedings, Party I
workman namely, Shri Cruz Fernandes represented
by Shri Subhash Naik Jorge settled the matter
amicably with Party II by filing the terms at
Exb. 26, which read as under:
1) It is agreed between the parties that the
Party II shall pay an amount of Rs. 1,40,000/-
(Rupees One lakh forty thousand only) to
Mr. Cruz Fernandes in full and final
settlement of his dispute.
2) It is agreed by Mr. Cruz Fernandes that in
view of payment of above said amount, he
does not press for his demand of
reinstatement with the Party II and agrees
that his dispute with the Party II is
conclusively settled.
3) It is agreed and declared that the amount
payable by the Company to the workman in
the manner hereinabove provided for is in
full & final settlement and satisfaction of all
the claims of the workman against the
Company including claims for compensation
for loss of office or otherwise whatsoever.
4) It is agreed between the parties that the
payment shall be made to the workman on
the date of filing of these terms before the
Tribunal for Award in terms thereof.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1456
8. The above settlement terms are signed by the
Party I workman, Shri Cruz Fernandes and his
representative Shri Subhash Naik, so also by
Party II and their Advocate Shri P. J. Kamat.
9. I have gone through the records of the case
and the settlement terms filed as above. I am
convinced that the above settlement terms are in
the interest of Party I workman, Shri Cruz Fernandes
and hence the same are accepted.
10. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
1. The reference at the instance of Party I
workman, Shri Cruz Fernandes stands
disposed of in view of above settlement
terms filed by the said workman and
Party II.
2. No order as to costs.
3. Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Vincent D’Silva),
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal and
Labour Court.
________
Notification
No. 28/9/2017-LAB/605
The following award passed by the Industrial
Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on
12-07-2017 in reference No. IT/05/94 is hereby
published as required by Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of
1947).
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Georgina Saldanha, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 24th August, 2017.
______
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND
LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Vincent D’Silva, Hon’ble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/05/94
Workmen,
Rep. by the President,
Federation of Goa Trade Union,
1st Floor, Mabai Building,
Margao-Goa.
… Workmen/Party I
V/s
M/s. Dalmia Resorts International
Pvt. Ltd.,
The Old Anchor, Mobor,
Cavelosim-Goa.
… Employer/Party II
Workmen/Party I represented by Shri Subhash Naik
Jorge.
Employer/Party II represented by Ld. Adv. Shri P. J.
Kamat.
AWARD
(Delivered on this the 12th day of the month
of July of the year 2017)
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (d)
of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (for short the Act),
the Government of Goa by order dated 13-10-93
bearing number 28/42/93-LAB has referred the
following dispute for adjudication.
“(1) Whether the action of the management of
M/s. Dalmia Resorts International Pvt. Ltd.
(The Old Anchor), Cavelossim, in dismissing
the following workmen with effect from
15-9-92, is legal and justified?
(1) Shri Cruz Cardozo.
(2) Shri Cruz Fernandes.
(3) Shri Domnic Rodrigues.
(4) Shri Aurelio D’Costa.
(5) Shri Joaquim Mendes.
(6) Shri Paul Cruz.
(7) Shri Joseph Mascarenhas.
If not, to what relief each of the workmen is
entitled?”
2. Upon receipt of the dispute reference No. IT/
/5/94 was registered. Notices were issued to both
the parties under registered post, upon which both
the parties were served. Party I filed a claim
statement at Exb. 3. Party II filed a written
statement at Exb. 5. Rejoinder was filed by Party I
at Exb. 6.
3. In short, it is the case of Party I/workmen that
they were initially the members of union by name
‘The Old Anchor Dalmia Resorts Employees Union’
which union got affiliated to a Federation of Trade
Union’s i.e. Party I union. It is stated that in or
about Feb., 1992 Party II suspended two of its
employees without any valid reason to which the
employees objected and the Federation gave a
notice to Party II to withdraw the suspension order
failing which they would resort to a strike. The
Party II did not withdraw the suspension order and
as such employees went on strike from 23-3-92
which lasted for about 18 days and was later
withdrawn due to some understandings arrived at
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1457
between Party II and the employees. It is also stated
that Party II issued charge sheets to 41 workmen
including Party I workmen during the period when
the employees had gone on strike, however later
on decided to withdraw suspensions as well as
charge sheets issued to all the employees, except
14 workmen and decided to continue enquires
against the said 14 employees.
4. It is also stated that subsequently Party II
took back 7 more employees in service by
withdrawing the suspension orders and dropping
charges but did not withdraw the suspension
orders nor dropped the charges against Party I
workmen. It is stated that after completing the
enquiry, Party II terminated the services of Party I
workmen. The charge sheets issued to Party I
workmen are totally false and are issued with a
view to victimize them for participating in the
agitation and the strike called by the union. It is
stated that the enquiry conducted against Party I
workmen was in violation of principles of natural
justice and no sufficient opportunity was given to
them to defend themselves in the enquiry. Thus, it
is the case of Party I that termination of services of
Party I workmen by Party II w.e.f. 15-9-92 is illegal
and unjustified and they are entitled to be
reinstated in service with full back wages and
continuity in service.
5. In the written statement, Party II has raised
objections on the maintainability of the reference
by stating that there is no industrial dispute as
defined in Section 2(k) or Section 2(A) of Industrial
Disputes Act. It is stated that two of the employees
were suspended due to assault on the
representative of Party II and thus they were
suspended. It is stated that being aggrieved by
the said suspension orders, some of the workers
along with others obstructed the managerial,
supervisory and administrative staff so also stopped
the vehicles of guests and threatened and
intimidated them and that the Party I workmen
were also amongst the said striking workers. It is
stated that Party II issued chargesheets to each of
the employees and they were asked to submit their
explanation and thereafter enquiry was held
against each workmen individually and that the
enquiry was conducted by following the principles
of natural justice and the workmen were given full
opportunity to defend themselves in the enquiry
and that on completion of the enquiry, the Enquiry
Officer submitted his findings holding the workmen
guilty of the charges leveled against them and
pursuant to that, Party II dismissed the workmen
from service.
6. In the rejoinder, Party I have denied the case
set up by Party II in the written statement.
7. Based on the averments of the respective
parties, issues came to be framed on 13-11-1995.
8. It is a matter of record that during the course
of proceedings, Shri Aurelio D’Costa settled the
matter vide Order dated 13-06-2003. Similarly,
Shri Joseph Mascarenhas, Shri Cruz Cardoz, Shri
Joaquim Mendes, Shri Domnic John Rodrigues and
Shri Cruz Fernandes have settled their disputes
vide Orders dated 22-11-2010, 31-08-2015, 28-01-2016,
28-01-2016 and 29-06-2017 respectively.
9. In the course of further proceedings, Party I
workman namely, Shri Paul Cruz represented by
Shri Subhash Naik Jorge settled the matter
amicably with Party II by filing the terms dated
11-07-2017 at Exb. 46, which read as under:
1) It is agreed between the parties that
the management of M/s. Old Anchor,
Cavelossim Beach, Mobor, Salcete, Goa shall
pay a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two
lakhs only) by Cheque No. 080007 dated
04-07-2017, drawn on IDBI Bank, K. G. Marg,
New Delhi, which shall include all his
claims arising from and out of the present
reference and his employment with Old
Anchor, Goa. The above amount shall
include all his claims of unpaid wages,
bonus, leave encashment, gratuity,
ex-gratia, etc. if any, or any other claims/
/benefits which can be computed in terms
of money.
2) It is agreed by the Party I that he shall
accept the amount mentioned in the Clause
(1) in full and final settlement of all his
claims arising from and out of the
employment, in complete satisfaction of all
the claims made in the present reference
and further confirm that he shall have no
claim of whatsoever nature against
the company including any claim of
re-instatement or/and re-employment.
10. The above settlement terms are signed by
the Party I workman, Shri Paul D’Cruz and his
representative Shri Subhash Naik Jorge, so also by
Party II and their Advocate Shri P. J. Kamat.
11. I have gone through the records of the case
and the settlement terms filed as above. I am
convinced that the above settlement terms dated
11-07-2017 at Exb. 46 are in the interest of Party I
workman, Shri Paul Cruz, so also Party II. Hence,
the same are accepted.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1458
12. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
1. The reference at the instance of Party I
workman, Shri Paul Cruz stands disposed
of in view of above settlement terms dated
11-07-2011 filed by the said workman and
Party II.
2. No order as to costs.
3. Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Vincent D’Silva),
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal and
Labour Court.
________
Notification
No. 28/9/2017-LAB/606
The following award (Part-II) passed by the
Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa
on 21-07-2017 in reference No. IT/21/12 is hereby
published as required by Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of
1947).
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Georgina Saldanha, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 24th August, 2017.
______
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND
LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Vincent D’Silva, Hon’ble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/21/12
Workmen
Represented by the
General Secretary,
Goa MRF Union,
H. No. 282, Dr. P. S. Ramani Road,
Wadi, Talaulim,
Ponda, Goa (403 401)
.… Workmen/Party I.
V/s
M/s. M.R.F. Ltd.,
Tisk Usgao,
Goa (403 407)
…. Employer/Party II.
Workmen/Party I represented by Learned Adv.
Shri P. Agrawal.
Employer/Party II represented by Learned Adv.
Shri G. K. Sardessai.
AWARD (PART II)
(Delivered on this the 21st day of the month
of July of the year 2017)
This is an application filed by the Party II at
exhibit 282 for disposing of the reference.
2. Briefly stated, the case of the Party II is as
follows:
That by a Consent order passed by Hon’ble High
Court dated 24-07-2014 in Writ Petition 253/2014,
the Hon’ble Tribunal was requested to frame and
decide a preliminary issue as to whether an award
should be made in terms of settlement dated
06-04-2011. As per Clause 3 of the Minutes of Order
filed before the High Court, the parties had agreed
that if the preliminary issue aforesaid is held in
favour of the Petitioner Company, the tribunal shall
pass an award in terms of settlement dated
06-04-2011 in accordance with law, on the other
hand, if the tribunal rejects the Petitioners’
application for award in terms of settlement dated
06-04-2011, it shall proceed to decide the main
reference in accordance with law within 6 months
from the date of the award.
3. It is stated that the Hon’ble Tribunal was
pleased to frame four issues, amongst them, the
preliminary issue No. 3 was ‘whether Party No. II
proves that the settlement dated 06-04-2011 is fair,
legal, proper, has been accepted by the majority
and as it covers all the demands which are subject
matter of the present reference, an award needs to
be passed in terms of said settlement dated
06-04-2011’. The above issue framed by the
Industrial Tribunal (as mandated by High Court
Order), if decided would settle the main dispute
once and for all. This Hon’ble Tribunal passed an
Award dated 29-09-2016 disposing of the above
reference in terms of Issue No. 3 and that as the
consequence of the Award, no further dispute
survives as per the Consent Order dated
24-07-2014 filed before the Hon’ble High Court.
4. The Party I filed a reply inter-alia contending
that the Party II had acted against the consent
terms by stopping the payment of interim relief to
Party I workers as agreed upon and filed an
application for modification of Order dated
24-7-2014 on 15-2-2016. The Order of reference
dated 20-4-2012 cannot be disposed of without
deciding the remaining issues framed by the
Tribunal and therefore, the application be
dismissed.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1459
5. Arguments heard.
6. Admittedly, the Party II filed a Writ Petition
bearing No. 253/2014 before the Hon’ble High Court
of Bombay at Goa, in which Party I and Party II
arrived at a settlement by filing Minutes of order
dated 24-7-2014 and accordingly, the petition stood
disposed of in terms of the said Minutes of order.
It was agreed in Clause 3 of Minutes of order to
request the Tribunal to frame a preliminary issue
‘as to whether an award should be made in terms
of settlement dated 06-04-2011’. Further, in terms
of Clause 3, it was agreed that if the preliminary
issue is held in favour of the Party I, the tribunal
shall pass an award in terms of the settlement
dated 06-04-2011 and if the tribunal rejects the
said application, it shall proceed to decide the
main reference in accordance with law within 6
months from the date of the award.
7. There is no dispute that the tribunal framed
the issues namely (1) Whether the Party I/union
proves that the demands submitted by them vide
letter dated 25-5-11 are legal and justified?;
(2) Whether the Party I/union proves that the
persons who have signed the settlement dated
6-4-11 were not authorized on behalf of the
workmen to negotiate or enter into the said
settlement?; (2A) Whether the Party II proves that
refusal to concede and its legality and justification
is not an industrial dispute and hence the
reference made of such issue is beyond the scope
of the powers of the Appropriate Government?;
(2B) Whether the Party II proves that Party I
submitted the Charter of demands dated 16-09-2010
without terminating the settlement dated
27-11-2006 and as such the settlement still subsists
and is operational and binding; (3) Whether the
Party II proves that the settlement dated 6-4-2011
is fair, legal, proper, has been accepted by the
majority and as it covers all the demands, which
are subject matter of the present reference, an
award needs to be passed in terms of said
settlement dated 6-4-2011 and (3A) Whether the
Party II proves that the present reference does not
survive and deserves to be rejected in view of
settlement dated 01-12-2014 r/w settlement dated
06-04-2011. The Tribunal while passing the award
dated 29-9-2016 answered issues No. 2, 2A and 3
and accordingly, Part I Award dated 29-9-2016 was
passed in favour of Party II.
8. The findings on the above said issues have
settled the main dispute once and for all as the
issue No. 3 has been answered in the affirmative.
It has been held that the persons who have signed
the settlement dated 06-04-2011 were authorised
on behalf of the workmen to negotiate and enter
into the settlement and that the settlement dated
06-04-2011 is fair, legal and proper and has been
accepted by the majority and that it covers all the
demands which are subject matter of the present
reference and consequently, an award was ordered
to be passed in terms of settlement dated
06-04-2011. Once the Part I Award has been passed
holding that the settlement dated 06-04-2011 is
fair, legal and proper and that award was passed
in terms of the said settlement, no further dispute
survives between the parties. The Part I Award
dated 29-06-2016 would replace the terms of
reference. The remaining issue No. 1, 2-B and 3-A
have no bearing on the reference as it has been
already held that the settlement dated 06-04-2011
is fair, legal and proper, accepted by majority
covering all the demands which are subject
matter of present reference. The contention of
Ld. Adv. P. Agrawal that the order of reference
dated 20-04-2012 cannot be disposed of without
deciding the remaining issues framed by the
tribunal, therefore cannot be accepted.
9. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
1) The application at Exb. 282 for disposing of
the reference stands allowed.
2) It is held that as the consequence of the
Part-I Award passed on 29-9-2016, no further
dispute survives as per the Consent Order
dated 24-7-2014 filed before the Hon’ble
High Court.
3) Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Vincent D’Silva),
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal and
Labour Court.
———uuu———
Department of Personnel
__
Order
No. 6/18/2016-PER
Read: 1) Order No. 6/16/2013-PER/Part dated
25-11-2014.
2) Order No. 6/16/2013-PER/Part dated
26-03-2015.
3) Order No. 6/16/2013-PER/Part dated
24-08-2015.
4) Order No. 6/16/2013-PER/Part dated
22-09-2015.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1460
5) Order No. 6/16/2013-PER/Part dated
20-11-2015.
6) Order
No.
6/8/2016-PER
dated
04-08-2016.
7) Order No. 6/18/2016-PER dated
02-12-2016.
The Governor of Goa hereby extends the
probation period of the following Junior Scale
Officers of Goa Civil Service appointed to the cadre
vide Orders read in preamble from (1) to (6) above
for a further period of 06 months or till the
probation period is formally lifted whichever is
earlier w.e.f. 25-05-2017, in terms of Clause 15, 16 &
17 of O.M. No. 28020/1/2010-Estt.(C) dated
21-07-2014 of Ministry of Personnel, Public
Grievances & Pensions adopted by the State
Government vide O. M. No. 12/14/89-PER (Part)
dated 12-08-2014, and in terms of Rule 22 of Goa
Civil Service Rules, 2016.
1. Smt. Maya M. Pednekar.
2. Shri Santosh S. Kundaikar.
3. Shri Bhushan Keshav Savoikar.
4. Smt. Sheru Appa Shirodkar.
5. Smt. Varsha S. Naik.
6. Smt. Anju S. Kerkar.
7. Shri Gourish Shankar Kurtikar.
8. Shri Brijesh D. Manerkar.
9. Smt. Neetal P. Amonkar.
10. Shri Yeshwant D. Kamat Khadaye.
11. Smt. Olga Menezes.
12. Shri Arvind B. Khutkar.
13. Shri Pipi T. Murgaonkar.
14. Shri Sagun R. Velip.
15. Smt. Sushma D. Kamat.
16. Smt. Maria S. D’Souza.
17. Shri Gaurish J. Shankhwalkar.
18. Shri Mahadev J. Araundekar.
19. Shri Harish N. Adconkar.
20. Smt. Sarita Sadashiv Marathe alias Gadgil.
21. Smt. Sangeeta S. Rawool alias Smt. Sangeeta
Porob.
This is issued with the concurrence of the Goa
Public Service Commission conveyed vide Letter
No. COM/I/5/42(2)/2013/606 dated 03-08-2017.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 21st August, 2017.
Order
No. 7/47/2014-PER/2549
Read Order:1) 14020/03/2017. UTS-I dated 29-05-2017.
2) 14020/04/2016. UTS-I dated 01-10-2016.
3) 7/47/2014-PER dated 09-08-2017.
In partial modification to the Order cited (3)
above, the salaries of the following IAS officers are
to be adjusted against the posts as mentioned in
column (3) with effect from the dates as mentioned
in column (4) below:-
Sr.
Name of the
Salary to be
Salary to be
No.
officer
drawn from
drawn
the post
w.e.f.
1
2
3
4
1. Shri Amit Satija,
Commissioner 01-09-2017.
IAS (2008)
of Excise
2. Shri Ravi Jha,
Director of
24-07-2017.
IAS (2011)
Information
Technology
3. Smt. Anjali
Collector
01-09-2017.
Sehrawat, IAS
(South)
(2013)
4. Shri Ajit Roy,
Director of
01-09-2017.
IAS (2013)
Industries
Shri Ajit Roy, IAS, shall draw salary from the
date of his joining the State administration i.e.
24-07-2017 till 31-08-2017 from the Leave & Training
Reserve of Goa Civil Service.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Yetindra M. Maralkar, Additional Secretary
(Personnel).
Porvorim, 22nd August, 2017.
________
Corrigendum
No. 6/13/2017-PER/2544
Read: 1) Order No. 6/13/2017-PER dated 06-07-2017.
The row at Sr. No. 3, read in preamble (1) shall
be deleted. The following para shall be inserted
after the table:
Dr. Y. Durga Prasad, Joint Director, Planning shall
hold additional charge of the post of Director of
Planning, Statistics and Evaluation, until further
orders.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 18th August, 2017.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1461
Department of Science, Technology &
Environment
__
Order
No. 175-10-2016/STE-DIR/382
Sub.: Constitution of an expert committee at State
Level to ensure that untreated/partially
treated sewage or industrial effluents may
not be disposed in wetlands.
As per the advised by the Ministry of Environ-
ment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) to
ensure that:
1. The untreated/partially treated sewage or
industrial effluent is not disposed of in any
wetlands by Panchayat, Urban Local Body,
Industries or PSU. For the purpose of
treatment, the norms/standards prescribed
by the Goa State Pollution Control Board
shall be the criteria.
2. Immersion of idols is not permitted in any
wetland in contravention to the ‘Guidelines
for idol immersion’ brought out by Central
Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and
PROBES/136/2010–June, 2010.
Accordingly, Goa State Wetland Authority has
constituted an expert committee at State Level to
ensure that untreated/partially treated sewage or
industrial effluents are not disposed in wetlands
and strict compliance to the wetlands (Conservation
and Management Rules, 2010).
The duties of the members would be to ensure
that the wetlands (Conservation and Management)
Rules, 2010 are thoroughly complied and
implemented across the State. The committees
would also ensure that the local bodies such as
Directorate of Panchayats and Directorate of
Municipal Administration take necessary steps to
ensure that the untreated/partially treated sewage
or industrial effluents are not disposed in wetlands
and bring the notice of the Authority the violations
occurring at local level during the idol immersion
and oversee the process.
The term of this committee would be initially
for the period of one year and may be subsequently
renewed.
Following members have been nominated on the
committee.
1. The Chief Town Planner or Representative,
Town and Country Planning Department,
Panaji-Goa.
2. Director or Representative, Directorate of
Panchayats, Panaji-Goa.
3. Director or Representative, Directorate of
Municipal Administration, Panaji-Goa.
4. The Member Secretary, Goa State Biodiversity
Board, HOD, Nodal Agency, Goa State
Wetlands Authority (GSWA), Saligao-Goa.
5. The Member Secretary, Goa State Pollution
Control Board, Panaji-Goa.
6. The Representative, Goa State Council for
Science & Technology, Saligao-Goa.
7. Dr. G. N. Nayak, Subject Matter Expert,
GSWA.
8. Dr. Vinod Dhargalkar, Former Scientists,
National Institute of Oceanography, Dona
Paula, Goa.
9. The Director (Environment), Member
Secretary, Goa State Wetland Authority–
Convenor.
Parag M. Nagarcenkar, Director & ex officio Joint
Secretary (Env.).
Porvorim, 22nd August, 2017.
———uuu———
Department of Urban Development
Corporation of the City of Panaji
__
Notification
Ref.: 13/22/TAX/TVC/CCP/2017-18/3285
As per the letter No. 10/369/2015/DMA/Part/2171
dated 07-11-2016 received from Directorate of
Municipal Administration/Urban Development to
re-constitute the Town Vending Committee. The
same is to be re-constituted as per Goa Street
Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation
of Street Vending) Rules, 2016 as per Notification
No. 10/369/2015/DMA/Part/2021 dated 19-10-2016.
The proposed Committee to be re-constituted as
per the rules mentioned above as under:-
1. a) Commissioner, CCP – Chairperson.
2. a) Shri Shekhar Degvekar–Member– Corporator.
b) Smt. Ashmita Kerkar–Member–Corporator.
c) Shri Uday Madkaikar–Member–Corporator.
3. Dy. Collector & SDM/SDO, Panaji–Member.
4. Member Secretary, NGPDA–Member.
5. a) Police Inspector–Panaji Police Station–
–Member.
b) Police Inspector–Traffic Cell, Panaji–
–Member.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 22
31ST AUGUST, 2017
1462
6. (11) Representative of Street Vendors Associa-
tions.
a) Shri Bharat Tukaram Hoble–Member.
b) Smt. Molina Albuquerque–Cart Vendor–
–Member.
c) Smt. Shantabai Khandeparkar–Cart Vendor–
–Member.
d) Smt. Mumtaz Bi–Cart Vendor–Member.
e) Shri K. Mohammed–Cart Vendor–Member.
f) Shri John Mascarenhas–Cart Vendor–
–Member.
g) Shri Chottelal Gupta–Cart Vendor–Member.
h) Shri Rustom Sheikh–Cart Vendor–Member.
i) Shri Ram Janam Gund–Cart Vendor–
–Member.
j) Shri Dullo Gaunco–Cart Vendor–Member.
k) Shri Rajesh Gupta–Cart Vendor–Member.
7. President of Market and Trade Associations–
–Member.
8. Two representatives of Non Government
Organizations (NGO) and one representative
of Community Based Organizations (CBO)–
–Member.
a) Tallulah D’Silva (NGO).
b) Sabina Martins (NGO).
c) Greogory Jacques (CBO).
9. Two representative of Residential Welfare
Associations (RWA)–Members.
i) Shri Reginaldo D’Souza–Chairman-Pearly
Shell Hsg. Society, Miramar.
ii) Shri Simon Fernandes–Kundaikar Nagar Hsg.
Co-op. Society.
10. Branch Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce–
–Member.
11. Medical Officer from Urban Health Centre–
–Member Secretary.
12. Mr. Kedar Malik–Legal Advisor–Member.
Dipak Dessai, Commissioner.
Panaji, 29th June, 2017.
V. No. A-834/2017.
www.goaprintingpress.gov.in
Published and Printed by the Director, Printing & Stationery,
Government Printing Press,
Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.
PRICE–Rs. 10.00
PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA–208/350–8/2017.