Panaji, 19th September, 2019 (Bhadra 28,1941)
SERIES II No. 25
375
Suggestions are welcomed on e-mail: [email protected]
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410
Reg. No. G-2/RNP/GOA/32/2018-20
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
Department of Education, Art & Culture
Directorate of Technical Education
College Section
—
Order
No. 16/150/Confirmation/GEC/04/P.F.II/1730
On the recommendations of the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide their letters
No. COM/II/12/18(1)/2014/168 and No. COM/II/12/18(1)/2013/169 dated 16-08-2019, the Government of
Goa is pleased to declare the following Group ‘A’ Gazetted Officers of Goa College of Engineering,
Farmagudi, Ponda-Goa to have satisfactorily completed their probation period and confirm them in the
post with effect from the date mentioned in the respective column against their names.
Sr.
Name of faculty
Designation
Date of completion
No.
of probation period
1
2
3
4
1. Dr. Sebestiao Benjamin Mesquita
Associate Professor in Mathematics
19-10-2000.
2. Shri Govind R. Kunkolienkar
Associate Professor in Electrical &
07-04-2006.
Electronics Engineering
3. Shri Umesh A. Bapat
Associate Professor in Computer
10-04-2006.
Engineering
4. Mrs. Maruska F. C. Mascarenhas
Associate Professor in Computer
28-07-2006.
Engineering
5. Shri Nilesh B. Fal Dessai
Associate Professor in Information
26-03-2007.
Technology
6. Dr. Ganesh Narayan Hegde
Associate Professor in Civil
02-03-2015.
Engineering
7. Ms. Aisha C. F. Fernandes
Associate Professor in Information
07-11-2018.
Technology
8. Dr. Jagannath Hirkude
Associate Professor in Mechanical
20-12-2018.
Engineering
9. Shri Raghavendra D. Naik
Assistant Professor in Mechanical
29-05-2015.
Engineering
10. Smt. Sneha Ulhas Phadate
Assistant Professor in Electrical &
25-12-2017.
Electronics Engineering
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Vivek B. Kamat, Director & ex officio Addl. Secretary (Technical Education).
Porvorim, 11th September, 2019.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
376
Directorate of Archives & Archaeology
—
Order
No. 9/12/8/EDN/2018-19/46
On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission, as conveyed vide their letter
No. COM/II/12/4(1)/2019/143 dated 15th July, 2019, the Government is pleased to declare satisfactory
completion of probation period of two years of following officer as detailed below in the post of Archivist
(Management), Group ‘B’ Gazetted in the Directorate of Archives and Archaeology and also to confirm
him against the said post with effect from the date of his completion of probation period.
Sr.
Name
Designation
Date of
Date of completion
No.
Joining
of probation period
1
2
3
4
1.
Shri Vasu Madhu Usapkar
Archivist (Management)
09-10-2014
08-10-2016.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Blossom Medeira, Director & ex officio Joint Secretary (Archives and Archaeology).
Panaji, 28th August, 2019.
________
Order
No. 9/12/8/EDN/2018-19/47
On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission, as conveyed vide letter No. COM/II/
/12/4(2)/2019/142 dated 15th July, 2019, the Government is pleased to declare satisfactory completion of
probation period of two years of following officer as detailed below in the post of Scientific Officer, Group
‘B’ Gazetted in the Directorate of Archives and Archaeology and also to confirm her against the said post
with effect from the date of her completion of probation period.
Sr.
Name
Designation
Date of
Date of completion
No.
Joining
of probation period
1
2
3
4
5
1.
Kum. Gayatri Gurudas Ghatwal
Scientific Officer
30-01-2015
29-01-2017
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Blossom Medeira, Director & ex officio Joint Secretary (Archives and Archaeology).
Panaji, 28th August, 2019.
________
Order
No. 9/12/8/EDN/2018-19/48
On the recommendation of Goa Public Service Commission, as conveyed vide letter No. COM/II/12/
/4(3)/2019/141 dated 15th July, 2019, the Government is pleased to declare satisfactory completion of
probation period of two years of following officer as detailed below in the post of Assistant Superintending
Archaeologist, Group ‘B’ Gazetted in the Directorate of Archives and Archaeology and also to confirm
him against the said post with effect from the date of his completion of probation period.
Sr.
Name
Designation
Date of
Date of completion
No.
Joining
of probation period
1
2
3
4
5
1.
Shri Varad Sudhir Sabnis
Assistant Superintending
01-12-2015
30-11-2017
Archaeologist
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Blossom Medeira, Director & ex officio Joint Secretary (Archives and Archaeology).
Panaji, 28th August, 2019.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
377
Department of Environment
—
Addendum
No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part II/479
Read: (1) Notification No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part I/557
dated 14-07-2008 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 15 dated 15-07-2008
(Extraordinary No. 5).
(2) Addendum No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part I/
/1546 dated 15-01-2010 published in
Official Gazette, Series II No. 44 dated
28-01-2010.
(3) Addendum No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part I/105
dated 23-04-2015 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 9 dated 28-05-2015.
(4) Notification No. 2/3/2002-HD(G)/Part/44
dated 02-01-2019 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 41 dated 10-01-2019.
(5) Notification No. 2/3/2002-HD(G)/Part/199
dated 11-01-2019 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 43 dated 24-01-2019.
In the Notification & Addendum read above at
Sr. No. (1), (2) & (3) and in view of Government
issuing Notification dated 02-01-2019 read at (4)
above and Notification dated 11-01-2019 read at (5)
above; in the list of “Authority” after Sr. No. 14, the
following shall be inserted, namely:-
“(15) The Dy. Collector & Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Sanguem-Goa.
(16) The Dy. Collector & Sub-Divisional Magistrate,
Satari-Goa.”
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Johnson Fernandes, Director & ex officio
Joint Secretary (Environment).
Porvorim, 13th September, 2019.
________
Addendum
No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part II/480
Read: (1) Notification No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part I/922
dated 04-12-2007 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 37 dated 13-12-2007.
(2) Notification No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part I/
/1545 dated 15-01-2010 published in
Official Gazette, Series II No. 44 dated
28-01-2010.
(3) Notification No. 7/4/98/STE/DIR/Part I/104
dated 23-04-2015 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 9 dated 28-05-2015.
(4) Notification No. 2/3/2002-HD(G)/Part/44
dated 02-01-2019 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 41 dated 10-01-2019.
(5) Notification No. 2/3/2002-HD(G)/Part/199
dated 11-01-2019 published in Official
Gazette, Series II No. 43 dated 24-01-2019.
In view of the Government issuing Notifications
dated 02-01-2019 & 11-01-2019, read at (4) & (5)
above; in the list of “authority” so designated, in
pursuance of Rule 2(c) of the Noise Pollution
(Regulation and Control) Rules, vide Notification
dated 04-12-2007, read at (1) above; the following
new Sr. Nos. shall be inserted, as below:-
1) after Sr. No. (8) and before Sr. No. (9), new
Sr. No. (8a) shall be inserted, namely:-
“(8a) Dy. Collector & Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Satari.”
2) after Sr. No. (12b) and before Sr. No. (13),
new Sr. No. (12c) shall be inserted, namely:-
“(12c) Dy. Collector & Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Sanguem”.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Johnson Fernandes, Director & ex officio Jt.
Secretary (Environment).
Porvorim, 13th September, 2019.
———uuu———
Department of Labour
—
Notification
No. 28/2/2019-LAB/Part-I/544
The following award passed by the Industrial
Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on
15-07-2019 in reference No. IT/28/16 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.
A. S. Mahatme, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 12th September, 2019.
______
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND
LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Vincent D’Silva, Hon’ble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/28/16
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
378
Shri Mukesh R. Gaude & 12 Others,
Rep. by the General Secretary,
Goa Trade & Commercial Workers Union,
Velhos’ Building, 2nd Floor,
Panaji, Goa-403 001.
…
Workmen/Party I
V/s
M/s. Terecom Limited,
102, Kundaim Industrial Estate,
Kundaim, Goa-403 401.
…
Employer/Party II
Workman/Party I represented by Ld. Adv. Shri
Suhaas Naik.
Employer/Party II ex-parte.
AWARD
(Delivered on this the 15th day of the month
of July of the year 2019)
By Order dated 31-3-2016, bearing No. 28/4/2016-
-LAB/230, the Government of Goa in exercise of
powers conferred by Section 10 (1)(d) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short The Act),
has referred the following dispute to the Tribunal
for adjudication.
“(1) Whether the non-employment of the
following 13 workmen with effect from
13-09-2014 is an instance of refusal of
employment by the management of
M/s. Terecom Limited, 102 Plant, Kundaim
Industrial Estate, Kundaim, Goa or an act of
abandonment of services by the workmen?
Sr. No.
Name of the workmen
Designation
1.
Shri Mukesh R. Gaude
Sr. Operator.
2.
Shri Dasharath S. Bhomkar
Sr. Operator.
3.
Shri Mahesh G. Bhomkar
Sr. Operator.
4.
Shri Prashant Korgaonkar
Sr. Operator.
5.
Shri Sandesh E. Naik
Sr. Operator.
6.
Shri Mukesh J. Gaude
Operator.
7.
Shri Anil Priolkar
Operator.
8.
Shri Abhijit Kunkalikar
Operator.
9.
Shri Rajan Sankar
Operator.
10.
Shri Prabhakar Tiwari
Operator.
11.
Shri Tukna Gaudo
Technician.
12.
Shri Ryshikesh Phadte
Sr. Operator.
13.
Shri Sanjay Das
Sr. Operator.
(2) If not, what relief the workmen are entitled
to?”
2. Upon receipt of the reference, it was registered
as IT/28/16 and registered A/D notices were issued
to both the parties. Pursuant to service of notices,
Party I filed a Claim statement at Exb. 3.
3. In short, the case of the Party I is that the
Party I workmen were employed with Party II at its
factory at Kundaim, however suddenly from
13-9-2014 they were refused employment alleging
misconduct. They made several attempts to join
the duties, however the Party II did not allow them
to resume their duties. The Party II failed to pay
their salaries and refused to employ them. The
management tried to shift its plants and machinery
to unknown places against which a police
complaint was filed before Ponda Police. The matter
was referred to Assistant Labour Commissioner and
it advised the Party II to allow the workmen to
resume their normal duties, however the Party II
did not comply with the advice and continued to
refuse employment to Party I workmen. The action
of the Party II in refusing the employment is illegal,
unjustified and bad in law. The Union had raised
a substantial industrial dispute before the office of
the Labour Commissioner but due to adamant
attitude of the Party II, the matter ended in failure.
The Party II had taken a stand before the ALC,
Ponda that they have not refused the employment
but the workmen themselves had stopped
attending the duties. All the workmen are
presently unemployed and have no source of
income to maintain them. The Party I workmen
therefore entitled for immediate reinstatement, full
back wages and continuity in service along with
all other consequential benefits.
4. It is a matter of record that the Party II was
duly served and initially one Adv. Shri V. Narvekar
appeared on behalf of the Party II. It is also a matter
of record that Adv. P. Chawdikar appeared and
sought time to file written statement or file terms
of settlement on various dates of hearing. It is seen
that on 13-7-2018, Adv. Chawdikar filed an
application for relieving him from the present
matter which was allowed and an opportunity was
granted to file the written statement to Party II,
however inspite of opportunities, the Party II did
not file any written statement and accordingly the
matter proceeded ex-parte against the Party II.
5. In the course of evidence, the Party I examined
Shri. R. D. Mangueshkar as witness No. 1 and
produced on record a copy of unionization letter
dated 13-4-2015 along with resolution copy at
Exh. 8 colly, a copy of representation dated
17-4-2015 filed before the Labour Commissioner at
Exh. 9, a copy of letter dated 24-8-2015 issued by
the Party II to ALC, Ponda, a copy of rejoinder dated
27-8-2015 filed by the union at Exh. 11, a copy of
minutes of conciliation proceedings held on
27-8-2015 before the ALC, Ponda at Exh. 12. The
Party I also examined Shri Mukesh R. Gaude as
witness No. 2 who produced on record a copy of
letter dated 1-11-2006 at Exh. 15 and a copy of
letter dated 15-7-2013 at Exh. 16; Shri Sanjay K. Das
as witness No. 3 who produced on record a copy
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
379
of letter dated 28-7-2008 at Exh. 19 and a copy of
letter dated 15-7-2013 at Exh 20; Shri Sandesh E.
Naik as witness No. 4 who produced on record a
copy of letter dated 14-8-2008 at Exh. 23 and a
copy of letter dated 15-7-2013 at Exh. 24;
Shri Prabhakar Tiwari as witness No. 5 who
produced on record a copy of letter dated 6-7-2011
at Exh. 23 and a copy of letter dated 15-7-2013 at
Exh. 28; Shri Rishikesh G. Phadte as witness No. 6
who produced on record a copy of letter dated
27-8-2008 at Exh. 31 and a copy of letter dated
15-7-2013 at Exh. 32 and Shri Abhijit H.
Kunkoleinkar as witness No. 7 who produced on
record a copy of letter dated 30-4-2012 at Exh. 35
and a copy of letter dated 2-5-2012 at Exh. 36 and
closed its case.
6. Heard arguments.
7. The point for determination is whether the
non employment of thirteen Party I workmen w.e.f.
13-09-2014 is an instance of refusal of employment
by the management or an act of abandonment of
services by the workmen and if yes, whether the
Party I workmen are entitled for the relief claimed.
8. The Party I has examined seven witnesses in
support of its case including General Secretary of
Goa Trade and Commercial Workers Union, Shri
Rajendra Datta Mangueshkar. He has stated that
the Party I workmen were employed with Party II
at its factory at Kundaim and suddenly on 13-9-2014
refused employment alleging certain misconducts,
which are not proved against the workmen. The
Party II also failed to pay their earned salaries and
refused to employ them in the factory and that the
matter was referred to Assistant Labour
Commissioner who advised the Party II to allow
the workmen to resume their normal duties,
however the Party II did not comply with the advice
and refused employment and therefore, the action
on the part of Party II in refusing employment is
bad in law. The Party II also examined Shri Mukesh
R. Gaude who also claimed that he was employed
with Party II and worked continuously from the
date of appointment till the date of refusal of
employment and when he went to report for duty
on 13-9-2014, he was stopped by the Manager and
his services were terminated. The factory of Party
II is operational and has employed new worker in
his place and that he is unemployed and has no
source of income. The Party I also examined Shri
Sanjay K. Das who claimed that he was employed
with Party II and was working in the factory along
with other workmen. He also stated that when he
went to report for duty on 13-9-2014, he was stopped
and his services were terminated. Similarly, Shri
Sandesh E. Naik also stated that he was working
as Machine Operator and was working in the
factory along with the other workmen till the date
of refusal of employment. He also stated that when
he went to report for duty on 13-9-2014, he was
stopped and his services were terminated.
9. The narration of the above workmen has also
been ably corroborated by Shri Prabhakar Tiwari,
Shri Rishikesh G. Phadte and Shri Abhijit H.
Kunkoleinkar. They also stated that they were
employed with Party II and working with other
workmen continuously from the date of
appointment till the date of refusal of employment
and when they went to report for duty they were
not allowed to work and their services were
terminated. The witnesses examined by the Party
I have produced on record the appointment letters
and appraisals. The Party II have not led any
evidence nor denied the case of the workmen
concerned by way of filing the written statement.
The minutes of conciliation proceedings at Exb. 12
show that it is case of the Party I workmen that
they were refused employment and that they asked
for reinstatement with back wages and while
refuting the said contention, it is claimed by the
Party II that all 13 workmen have not attended the
duties since 20-5-2013 and that they stopped work
of their own, however as rightly pointed out by Ld.
Adv. Suhaas Naik for Party I, no letter was issued
to the workmen asking them to report for the work,
so also no show cause notice, charge sheet nor
enquiry was held for abandoning the services and
therefore the case of abandonment fails. The
material on record therefore shows that the
Party I workmen were refused employment from
13-9-2014 onwards and that the action on the part
of Party II in refusing employment to Party I
workmen is illegal, unjustified and bad in law.
10. The question therefore is what reliefs the
Party I/workmen are entitled to, once it is held that
the refusal of service is illegal, whether they are
entitled for re-instatement with full back wages
and continuity in service with consequential
benefits attached to the post or adequate monetary
compensation in lieu of reinstatement and back
wages.
11. Needless to mention, ordinarily workmen
whose services have been illegally terminated
would be entitled for re-instatement except to the
extent they were gainfully employed during the
enforced idealness. The Court may substitute re-
instatement by compensation on justifiable ground
viz. where the industry is closed or where the
employee has superannuated or going to retire
shortly and no period of service is left to his credit
or where workman has been rendered incapacitated
to discharge the duties and is not fit to be
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
380
reinstated or when he has lost confidence of the
management to discharge duties. The case of Party
I do not fall in any of the categories mentioned
above so as to justify compensation in lieu of
reinstatement. The Party I workmen have been
refused employment by Party II although they were
working since their date of appointment
continuously till 13-9-2014. There is nothing on
record that the factory of Party II is non-operational
or that the workmen are not fit to be reinstated.
They are therefore entitled for reinstatement as
prayed for.
12. The Party I have proved that the termination
of their services were illegal and without following
the principles of natural justice. The employer has
terminated the services of Party I w.e.f. 13-09-2014.
The workmen who have been examined have
clearly deposed that they are unemployed and have
no source of income. There are no pleading or
evidence on behalf of the employer that the
workmen were gainfully employed after their
refusal/termination. It is also well settled that in
cases of refusal of service/termination, reinstatement
and back wages is a normal rule. The company is
still functioning and is carrying on business at
Kundaim Industrial Estate. The Party II has not
produced any documents including balance sheet
to show that it is running in loss, closed down or
is in severe financial doldrums or that the Party I
has been employed or secured better permanent
employment elsewhere. The Party I having proved
that the employer refused services illegally and it
is motivated and that the employer has taken away
their right to work, contrary to the relevant law
and has deprived them of the earnings, the Party
I is entitled for the reliefs claimed. There is no
dispute that the Party I have produced on record
the appraisals showing a salary structure of the
workman concerned. Therefore, considering the
above, with 50% back wages, continuity in services
and consequential benefits attached to the post to
the Party I workmen would serve ends of justice,
which would be just, proper and equitable in the
facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, the
above point is answered accordingly.
13. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i)
The reference stands allowed.
(ii)
The non-employment of the following 13
workmen with effect from 13-09-2014 is an
instance of refusal of employment by the
management of M/s. Terecom Limited, 102
Plant, Kundaim Industrial Estate, Kundaim,
Goa and not an act of abandonment of
services by the workmen.
(iii)
The Party II is directed to reinstate the
services of the Party I workmen with 50%
back wages, continuity in services and
consequential benefits attached to the post.
(iv)
The Party II is directed to deposit back wages
before the Tribunal as stated above within
60 days of the publication of the Award,
failing which the Party II shall pay an interest
@ 9% per annum.
(v)
Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Vincent D’Silva)
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal and
Labour Court.
________
Notification
No. 28/2/2019-LAB/Part-III/545
The following interim award passed by the
Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, at
Panaji-Goa on 23-07-2019 in reference No. IT/02/18
is hereby published as required under Section 17 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of
1947).
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
A. S. Mahatme, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 12th September, 2019.
______
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND
LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Vincent D’Silva, Hon’ble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/02/18
Workmen,
Rep. by the General Secretary,
Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh,
G-5, Macedo Apartments,
Tisk, Ponda, Goa-403 401 .… Workmen/Party I
V/s
1. M/s. Qualpro Diagnostic System,
Division of Tulip Diagnostics (P) Ltd.,
Verna Industrial Estate, Verna,
Salcete, Goa-403 722
.… Employer/Party II(1)
2. Goa Trade &Commercial Workers Union,
Velho’s Bldg., 2nd Floor,
Panaji, Goa-403 001
.… Workmen/Party II(2)
Workman/Party I represented by Shri P. Gaonkar
along with Ld. Adv. Shri S. P. Gaonkar.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
381
Employer/Party II(1) represented by Ld. Adv. Shri
M. S. Bandodkar.
Workmen/Party II(2) represented by Ld. Adv. Shri
Suhaas Naik.
INTERIM AWARD
(Delivered on this the 23rd day of the month
of July, of the year 2019)
This Order shall dispose of the application at
Exh. 8 filed by the Party I for interim relief.
2. Briefly stated, the case of the Party I is as
follows:
That the current wages of the workmen involved
in the present reference are meager and not
sufficient for day-to-day needs of average family as
seen from the wage slips produced along with the
claim statement. The cost of living and so also the
consumer price index have been rising
exponentially over the last years; however, the
wages have not increased commensurate to the
rise in the consumer price index. The current wage
structure does not provide for any increase in
relation to the increase in the cost of living index.
There is no variable dearness allowance being paid
to the workers. Whenever there is an increase in
the cost of living, the workers are entitled to an
increase in the salary so that the inflation does not
cut into their purchasing power. Balance of
convenience lies in favour of workmen since the
wages are in serious need of revision. The employer
had already thought it convenient to negotiate
with a particular handpicked union and entered
into an unfair settlement by ignoring the workers
concerned in the reference whose wages remained
stagnant. If the interim increase is not granted, the
financial difficulties faced by the workmen would
continue and would result in their economic
deprivation and therefore to avoid any cascading
effect on the lives of the workmen, the financial
deprivation must be temporarily put to an halt. No
prejudice would be caused to the employer, if the
application is allowed as they are liable to pay
wages commensurate to the cost of living reflecting
the ever rising inflation and therefore a sum of
Rs. 6500/- as interim increase in wages per workman
be allowed.
3. The Party II(1) filed a reply inter-alia contention
that the application is bad in law and not
maintainable and filed by a section of workers
which would amount to discrimination between
the workers. The Party I workers did not come with
clean hands as the Party I are representing some
of the workers without specifying which workers
are required to be paid. The company is having
majority union known as Goa Trade & Commercial
Workers Union and has signed comprehensive
Settlement dated 9-8-2017 on the Charter of
demands dated 22-2-2017 under Section 2(p) read
with Section 18(1) of the Act and offered benefits
to the minority union and some of the members of
the said union accepted the settlement but the
Party I have not accepted the settlement and have
not been giving the productivity as agreed in the
said settlement. There is no justification given for
interim relief of Rs. 6500/- per month. The union
has no locus standi to file the application for
interim relief. The Party II have given substantial
rise to all the workers who have signed the
settlement and the Party I have refused to accept
the benefits of the said settlement and therefore
there is no scope for asking for interim relief.
No case has been made out by Party I for grant of
the application. No prejudice would be caused to
Party I and therefore the application be dismissed.
4. Heard arguments. Notes of Written arguments
came to be placed on record by Party I as well as
Party II(1).
5. Learned Adv. Shri S. P. Gaonkar for Party I has
submitted that the current wages of the workmen
involved in the present reference are meager and
not sufficient for day-to-day needs of an average
family as seen from the wage slips. The inflation
reduces the real value of Rupee and said factors
along with rising Consumer Price Index have to be
considered. The real value of the workmen’s salary
in 2018 is Rs. 16,890/- and therefore in real value
terms the increase is mere Rs. 1850/- for the year
2018 to 2019, Rs. 1850/- for 2019 to 2020 and
Rs. 2150/- from April, 2020 to September, 2020 and
that is the future increase of Rs. 5850/- on
September, 2020 and therefore the salary which is
currently around Rs. 19,000/- would increase to
Rs. 24,850/- which clearly shows that the
purchasing power of the pay package will go on
reducing in coming future even if the rate of
inflation does not increase. The cost of living so
also consumer price index has been rising
exponentially over the last years, however the
wages have not increased. The current wage
structure does not provide for any increase in
relation to the increase in the cost of living index.
There are no variable dearness allowances being
paid to the workers. He further submitted that the
Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd.
vs. B. N. Dongre, (1994) 6 SCC 157 has observed
that if the rise in the pay packet does not keep
pace with the rise in prices of essentials, the
purchasing power of the pay packet falls reducing
the real wages leaving the workers and their
families worse off and therefore, if on account of
inflation, prices rise while the pay packet remains
frozen, the real wages will fall sharply. He further
submitted that the balance of convenience for
grant of interim increase lies in favour of the
workmen since their wages are in serious need of
revision. The employer has already thought it
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
382
convenient to negotiate only with a particular
handpicked union and entered into unfair
settlement and if interim increase is not granted,
the financial difficulties faced by the workmen
would continue and result in economic deprivation.
No prejudice would cause to the employer since it
is its duty to treat all the workmen fairly and
reasonably and therefore the application be
allowed.
6. Per contra, Ld. Adv. Shri M. S. Bandodkar for
Party II(1) has submitted that the Court can pass
interim award only as per Section 2(b) of the Act
and an interim award can be granted only on the
basis of subject matter of reference and in support
thereof, he relied upon the case of Maharashtra
Girls Education Society, Pune vs. Maharashtra
Karmachari Sanghatana, Pune, (2018) III CLR 601.
He further submitted that the Party II(1) and Party
II(2) have signed a settlement with vast majority of
workers on their Charter of demands on 22-2-2017
and the said settlement has been signed on
9-8-2017 and accepted by the majority of members
of union without any exception by all the
establishments of Party II(1) and that the said
settlement is fair and reasonable and the settlement
signed by the majority has to be accepted by the
minority. The Party I have not accepted the
settlement and that they are not giving the
productivity as agreed as per clause 19 of the
settlement and therefore not entitled for any interim
reliefs. In support thereof, he relied upon the cases
of Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. vs.
Their workmen, Civil Appeal No. 1484 of 1971
dated 16-10-1981.
7. It is well settled that the Tribunal has powers
to grant interim reliefs in terms of expression
‘incidental thereto’ occurring in Section 10(4) of
Industrial Disputes Act as held in the case of
Management Hotel Imperial, New Delhi and
others vs. Hotel Workers Union, 1960 (1) SCR
476. It is also well established that merely because
Court is vested with the powers of granting interim
relief in an application under Section 2-A(2) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, the same would not relieve
Party I from establishing the three preconditions
required for seeking such a relief as pointed out in
the judgment in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra
Limited vs. Dwarkanath Babaji Dalvi & Anr., 2006
I CLR 902. The Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in
Webel Nicco Electronics Ltd. vs. Anima Roy,
1997(II) CLR 158, has laid down the parameters for
grant of interim relief by the Industrial Tribunal.
These parameters are (a) prima facie case and (b)
balance of convenience.
8. The following points therefore arise for my
determinations which are mentioned along with
their findings and reasons thereof.
Points
Findings
1. Whether the Party I have made
In the
out a prima facie case for
Negative.
grant of relief claimed?
2. Whether irreparable loss and
In the
inconvenience would cause to
Negative.
Party I in case of non grant of
relief claimed?
POINT 1
9. The present reference is for the Charter of
demands raised by the Union vide letter dated
28-11-2016 against the management of M/s. Qualpro
Diagnostics System, a division of Tulip Diagnostic
Ltd., Verna Industrial Estate, Verna. There is no
dispute that the company has signed five
settlements i.e. dated 23-02-2008, 24-01-2011,
22-05-2014, 10-06-2014 and 09-08-2017. In all the
settlements, the Party II has given substantial
benefits to all workmen and settlement dated
22-05-2014 has been accepted by Gomantak
Mazdoor Sangh in toto without making any
allegation. There is also no dispute that 2/3rd of
the workmen have accepted the settlement dated
09-08-2017 for the period from 01-04-2017 to
30-09-2020. The said settlement signed by the
parties is a comprehensive settlement on the
Charter of demands dated 22-2-2017 which was
signed on 09-08-2017 and accepted by majority
members of union by all the establishment of
Party II and the said settlement has been offered to
all the members of the Party I and some of them
have accepted the said settlement.
10. Curiously enough, it is not known how many
of the workmen of Party I have raised the present
dispute and how many of them have been
challenging the said settlement dated 09-08-2017
to be unfair, malafide, unreasonable and against
the interest of the workmen. It is also not known
nor statement of claim filed on behalf of the
Party I workmen show that they are challenging
the settlement dated 09-08-2017 entered into by
majority union and the Party II. The Party I have
also not specified on whose behalf the demands
have been raised or whether the said persons are
the members of the union nor any list of workmen
have been filed nor any resolution seeking to raise
demand on the management has been produced
nor filed any affidavit in support of its case. The
fact remains that the Party I workmen have not
accepted the settlement nor they are giving the
productivity as agreed as per clause 19 of the
settlement. The settlement has been arrived by
vast majority of the concerned workers with their
eyes open and also accepted by them in its totality,
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
383
which fact cannot be ignored by the Tribunal as
when a recognised union negotiates with the
employees, it is expected to protect the best
interest of the workers. There are also no allegations
of malafide, fraud, corruption or other inducement
with respect to the settlement arrived at by the
parties and in the absence of the said allegations,
it cannot be said that the said settlement is unfair
or arbitrary as claimed by Party I in the application
for interim relief nor Party I workers who are in
minority have established the case for grant of any
reliefs at this stage.
11. Moreover, the terms of said settlement cannot
be considered to be in any way ex-facie, unjust or
unfair in the absence of challenge to the same as
settlement of labour dispute by direct negotiation
and collective bargaining is always to be preferred
for it is the best guarantee of industrial peace and
harmony between the employer and the workmen.
The Party II(1) and Party II(2) have signed a
comprehensive settlement arising out of the
Charter of demands dated 22-2-2017 covering all
the demands of Party I, which ensures industrial
peace and merely because some of the employees
do not agree to the terms of the settlement entered
into between the majority union and the employer,
they cannot be permitted to contend that it was
negotiated with a hand-picked union or that it
was an unfair settlement. No such case has been
even alleged by the Party I union, much less made
out by the Party I in the dispute raised by them
before the appropriate authority or in the claim
statement or in the application for interim relief.
The claim of Party I that the increase in the
consumer price index, justifies an upward revision
in wages, is not sufficient as by that fact alone, it
is not possible to draw an inference that the wages
paid is wholly inadequate to meet day to day
expenses, in the absence of any evidence to that
effect.
12. It requires a mention here that all the
establishments of Party II do not work separately
as seen from the Balance Sheet which is in the
name of Tulip Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. The
establishments as mentioned by the Party I as
divisions are not financially independent but they
are of the one company viz. Tulip Diagnostics Pvt.
Ltd. who has signed the settlements along with all
its establishments and are part and parcel of the
same company and therefore as rightly pointed
out by Ld. Adv. M. S. Bandodkar, the demands raised
by the Party I purporting to be on the division of
Tulip Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. is bad in law and the
firms viz. Orchids Biomedical Systems, Qualpro
Diagnostics, Zephyr Biomedical and Coral Clinical
System who were partnership concerns were
merged into Tulip Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. on
30-1-2017 and therefore from 31-1-2017 there are
no divisions but only one company known as Tulip
Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. Moreover, the local committee
of the union and all other workers have signed and
accepted the Settlement dated 4-12-2013 with Tulip
Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. and not any division of the
said company and have not raised any issue about
the same with the company at any time and as
such, the Party I Union cannot claim that the Party
II(1) is a division of Tulip Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. and
therefore the claim of the Party I is incapable of
being adjudicated and hence, prima facie no relief
as been claimed can be granted.
13. Moreover, there are no facts and figures
available on record justifying grant of upward wage
revision including granting additional basic pay
and other emoluments. There is no evidence before
the Tribunal in support of the case of Party I that
they are entitled for a sum of Rs. 6500/- as interim
increase in wages per workman per month nor
they have filed an application before the Tribunal
for an opportunity to lead evidence. The Party II(1)
have raised an issue of jurisdiction and
maintainability before grant of interim relief in the
matter which requires evidence before deciding
the said issue. There also cannot be any dispute
that the Party I have accepted the Settlement dated
10-06-2014 and as per clause (e) the parties have
agreed that during the operative period of the
settlement, the union/workmen shall not raise,
pursue/agitate any other demands of whatsoever
nature entailing additional financial or
administrative impact other than what has been
agreed in terms of the said settlement. The
Party I raised the Charter of demands giving a
goby to the Settlement dated 10-06-2014 as in view
of the said terms and conditions of the settlement,
they were precluded from raising any financial
demand till new settlement is signed in
accordance with law. It is therefore as rightly
submitted by Ld. Adv. M. S. Bandodkar in view of
the said clause of the settlement, the Party I cannot
make an application for interim relief. Moreover,
there are no materials on record on financial
position of the company, industry cum region,
paying capacity and comparable concern. The
settlements which have been relied upon by the
Party I are in no way comparable to the company
nor there is anything on record as to how those
settlements can be compared with one
establishment of the company and therefore the
wage structure as sought by the Party I cannot be
altered.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
384
14. There are also no materials about the
necessities of the workmen, the justification of their
demands for living wage or fair wage and the
extent thereof in the claim statement as well as
application for interim relief. In short, the claim of
Rs. 6500/- as interim increase in wages per workman
by Party I workmen would put an obligation on
Party II to pay increase in wages to Party I workmen
without any obligation on the part of the workmen
to increase in productivity, which would be
discriminatory and would disturb industrial peace
and therefore would not be desirable state of
affairs, which is required to be protected to avoid
friction and unhealthy litigation. There are
absolutely no justifiable reasons given by the
Party I as to how they are entitled for said increase
in wages. Merely, claiming that the current wages
of the workmen is not sufficient for day-to-day
needs of the family and that the cost of living, so
also the consumer price index has been rising
exponentially over the last years is not sufficient.
Prima facie therefore, the Party I has failed to show
any case in its favour. It is therefore, the point
No. 1 is answered in the negative.
POINT 2
15. It is claimed by Party I workmen that the
balance of convenience for grant of interim relief
is in favour of Party I workmen since their wages
are in serious need of revision and that the inflation
has cut into their purchasing power. It is also
claimed that the workers involved in the reference
has been ignored and their wages remained
stagnant and if their interim increase is not
granted, the workers will face financial difficulties,
resulting in economic deprivation and that no
prejudice would cause to the employer, if the
present application is allowed. However, as rightly
pointed out by Ld. Adv. Shri Bandodkar there is no
change in circumstances to warrant the Charter of
demands dated 4-12-2013 for revision in wages for
2017 when the Settlement dated 10-06-2014 signed
by the workers and the management revised the
wages till 31-3-2017. Moreover, the workers have
refused to give extra productivity which was one
of the reasons for increase in wages in 2017
settlement and since the minority union has refused
to sign the settlement dated 09-08-2017 and give
more productivity as agreed by the majority union,
balance of convenience cannot be said to be in
favour of the Party I workmen. No irreparable loss
would occasion to the Party I workmen as they
derive benefits of the Settlement dated 10-06-2014
which has revised the wages from 1-1-2013 to
31-3-2017 and unless they accept the settlement
and give extra productivity as per the new
settlement, irreparable loss would occasion to the
Party II(1). There would be also discrimination and
industrial unrest, if the demand of interim increase
in wages of Rs. 6500/- is granted to the Party I
workmen without accepting the settlement and
giving productivity as is being done by the majority
union in terms of the Settlement dated 09-08-2017.
No irreparable loss would cause to Party I workmen
if reliefs are not granted at this stage as their
charter of demands are pending for final
determination on merits. It is therefore the above
point No. 2 is answered accordingly.
16. Having said so, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The application filed by Party I for interim
relief at Exhibit 8 stands dismissed.
(ii) No order as to costs.
(iii) Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Vincent D’Silva)
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal and
Labour Court.
———uuu———
Department of Personnel
—
Order
No. 5/1/2018-PER/2414
The Governor of Goa is pleased to order transfer
of the following Junior Scale Officer of Goa Civil
Service, in public interest, with immediate effect:-
Sl.
Name of the
Posted as
No. Officer & present
post
1
2
3
1. Shri Sudin Natu,
Under Secretary to the
Under Secretary
Hon’ble Deputy Chief
(Revenue-I)
Minister, Shri Chandrakant
(Babu) Kavlekar. He shall
hold the charge of the post
of Under Secretary
(Revenue-I) in addition to
his own duties.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I)
Porvorim, 10th September, 2019.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
385
Order
No. 24/3/2017-PER/2443
Read: 1. Order No. 24/2/2016-PER dated 19-07-2017.
2. Order No. 24/3/2017-PER/657 dated
01-03-2018.
Sanction of the Government is hereby accorded
to Smt. Smita R. Chandwani and Shri Francisco
Julio da Piedade da Veiga Barbosa Noronha, both
Joint Secretary (Law), (Group “A” Gazetted), Law
Department (Legal Affairs) to draw pay in the
revised pay scale of Level 13 of the Pay Matrix of
the CCS (Revised) Pay Rules, 2016 with effect from
20-07-2019 as per the Conditions of Service, notified
vide Notification No. 1/2/2015-PER dated 22-05-2017,
published in the Official Gazette, Series I No. 9
dated 01-06-2017.
The pay of the officer shall be fixed accordingly
as per CCS (Revised) Pay Rules, 2016.
The officers shall exercise option to fix their pay
within one month from the date of this Order.
This issues with the concurrence of Finance
(Rev. & Cont.) Department vide their U.O. No.
1400042879 dated 05-08-2019 and Goa Public
Service Commission vide their letter No. COM/II/
/11/58(1)/2017/896 dated 30-08-2019.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Maya Pednekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 12th September, 2019.
________
Order
No. 7/3/2019-PER/2449
The Governor of Goa is pleased to transfer Shri
Shashank Mani Tripathi, IAS, Commissioner of
Corporation of City of Panaji and post him as
Director, Department of Sports and Youth Affairs
with immediate effect.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 13th September, 2019.
________
Order
No. 7/3/2019-PER/2438
Read: 1. Notification No. 7/3/2019-PER/2346 dated 29-08-2019.
2. Notification No. 7/3/2019-PER/2350 dated 30-08-2019.
In supersession of all orders issued in this regard, the standing arrangement for disposal of work
relating to the Departments under the charge of Secretary during the absence of the concerned Secretary
shall be as under:
Sr.
Name & Designation
1st Link Secretary
2nd Link Secretary
No.
1
2
3
4
1. Shri Parimal Rai, IAS (1985)
Shri Puneet Kumar Goel, IAS
Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS
Chief Secretary
(1991)
(2003)
1. Vigilance/Chief Vigilance Officer
2. Home
3. Personnel
4. ARD
5. PWD
6. Civil Aviation
2. Shri Puneet Kumar Goel, IAS (1991)
Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS
Shri Rupesh Kumar Thakur, IAS
Principal Secretary (Power)
(2003)
(2006)
1. Power
2. Non-Conventional Energy
3. Urban Development
4. Forest
5. Environment
6. Science & Technology
7. Nodal Officer (PMAY)
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
386
3. Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS (2003)
Shri Puneet Kumar Goel, IAS
Shri Rupesh Kumar Thakur, IAS
Commissioner & Secretary
(1991)
(2006)
(Finance)
1. Finance
2. Mines and Geology
3. Planning & Statistics
4. Town & Country Planning
4. Shri P. S. Reddy, IAS (2003)
Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS
Smt. Nila Mohanan, IAS (2007)
Secretary (Ports)
(2003)
1. Ports
2. River Navigation
3. Fisheries
4. Legal Metrology
5. Shri Rupesh Kumar Thakur, IAS
Smt. Nila Mohanan, IAS (2007) Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS
(2006)
(Except Sr. No. 1)
(2003) (Except Sr. No. 1)
Secretary to Governor
1. Secretary to Governor
2. Transport
3. Panchayat
4. Rural Development
5. Information and Publicity
6. Smt. Nila Mohanan, IAS (2007)
Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS
Shri Sanjay Kumar, IAS (2008)
Secretary (Education)
(2003)
1. Education
2. Industries, Trade & Commerce
3. Health
4. Handicrafts, Textile & Coir
7. Shri Sanjay Kumar, IAS (2008)
Smt. Nila Mohanan, IAS (2007) Shri P. S. Reddy, IAS (2003)
Secretary (Revenue)
1. Revenue
2. Social Welfare
3. NRI Affairs
4. Factories and Boilers
8. Shri J. Ashok Kumar, IAS (2008)
Shri Sanjay Kumar, IAS (2008)
Shri Sanjay Gihar, IAS (2008)
Secretary to Chief Minister
(Except Sr. No. 1)
(Except Sr. No. 1)
1. Secretary to Chief Minister
2. Sports & Youth Affairs
3. Tourism
4. Nodal Officer for ODF & Swatch
Bharat Mission
9. Shri Chokha Ram Garg, IAS (2008)
Shri Sanjay Gihar, IAS (2008)
Shri Kuldeep Singh Gangar,
Secretary (Women and Child
IAS (2009)
Development)
1. Women and Child Development
2. Tribal Welfare
3. Art & Culture
4. Skill Development &
Entrepreneurship
5. Archeology
6. Archives
7. Co-operation
8. Law & Judiciary and Legislative
Affairs
1
2
3
4
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
387
10. Shri Sanjay Gihar, IAS (2008)
Shri P. S. Reddy, IAS (2003)
Shri Kuldeep Singh Gangar,
Secretary (Water Resources)
IAS (2009)
1. Water Resources
2. Provedoria
3. Official Language
4. Public Grievances
5. Member Secretary, Goa State
Commission for Protection of Child
Rights
11. Shri Kuldeep Singh Gangar, IAS
Shri Chokha Ram Garg, IAS
Shri Sanjay Gihar, IAS (2008)
(2009)
(2008)
Secretary (Agriculture)
1. Agriculture
2. Housing
3. Animal Husbandry & Veterinary
Services
4. Protocol
12. Shri Ravi Jha, IAS (2011)
Shri Kuldeep Singh Gangar,
Shri Sanjay Kumar, IAS (2008)
Secretary (Information Technology)
IAS (2009)
1. Information Technology
2. Labour & Employment
3. Special Secretary (Personnel, Home
and Vigilance)
13. Ms. Isha Khosla, IAS (2011)
Shri Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS
Shri J. Ashok Kumar, IAS
Secretary (General Administration)
(2003)
(2008)
1. General Administration
2. Civil Supplies
3. Goa Gazetteer
4. Printing & Stationery
5. Museum
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 12th September, 2019.
________
Order
No. 15/1/99-PER (Part) CO.Sanguem/Pernem/2422
On the recommendation of Goa Services Board and with the approval of the Government, the following
transfers are ordered in the cadre of Mamlatdar/Joint Mamlatdar, in public interest, with immediate
effect:
Sr.
Name
Present posting
Posted as
No.
1.
Shri Anant Rajaram Malik
Joint Mamlatdar-III, Pernem
Mamlatdar, Pernem.
2.
Shri Rajesh Azgaonkar
Mamlatdar, Pernem
Chief Officer, Valpoi Municipal
Council.
Shri Pravinjay Pandit, Mamlatdar, Bicholim shall hold the charge of Chief Officer of Sankhali Municipal
Council in addition to his own duties thereby relieving Smt. Gautami Parmekar of the additional charge.
1
2
3
4
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
388
The posting of Shri Azgaonkar shall be governed by standard terms of deputation as amended from time
to time.
Shri Malik shall hold the additional charge of Joint Mamlatdar-III, Pernem.
All the above officers shall take charge immediately and submit compliance report.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 11th September, 2019.
________
Order
No. 6/10/2017-PER/2448
On the recommendation of the Goa Services Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order the
transfer and posting of the following Officers of Goa Civil Service, in public interest, with immediate
effect:-
Sr.
Name and present posting of
Posted as
No.
the officer
1.
Dipak Dessai, Director of Women and
Director, Directorate of Skill Development and
Child Development
Entrepreneurship.
2.
Deepali Naik, Joint Director (ICDS)
Director, Directorate of Women and Child
Development.
3.
Rajendra Mirajkar, awaiting posting
Member Secretary, Ravindra Bhavan, Margao.
4.
Sagun Velip, Member Secretary,
Director, Directorate of Tribal Welfare.
Ravindra Bhavan, Margao
5.
Meghanath Porob, awaiting posting
Managing Director, Goa Housing Board.
6.
Derrick P. Neto (on transfer)
Managing Director, Goa Human Resource
Development Corporation.
Sanjit Rodrigues, Project Director, D.R.D.A. (North) shall hold additional charge of Commissioner,
Corporation of City of Panaji.
Parag Nagorcekar, Director of Social Welfare shall hold the additional charge of Managing Director of
Goa State Minorities Finance and Development Corporation Ltd.
Mahadev Araundekar, Additional Collector (III), Mapusa shall hold the additional charge of SLAO, Goa
Industrial Development Corporation, Panaji-Goa.
Deepali Naik shall hold the additional charge of Joint Director (ICDS) and Member Secretary, Goa State
Commission for Women.
The officers posted against ex-cadre deputation posts shall be governed by standard terms of deputation
as amended from time to time.
The officers shall complete handing over and taking over process with immediate effect and submit
compliance.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 13th September, 2019.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
389
Order
No. 22/1/2018-PER/2452
The Governor of Goa is pleased to allocate the charges as mentioned against the name of the following
IPS Officers with immediate effect, in public interest:-
Sr.
Name
Present charge
New charge
No.
1.
Shri Utkrisht Prasoon, IPS
SP (ACB)
SP (North), Porvorim.
Additional charge of SP (SB), SP
(ANC) & SP (North), Porvorim
2.
Shri Shobhit D. Saksena, IPS
Awaiting posting
SP (ACB)
Additional charge of SP
(SB) and SP (ANC).
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Maya Pednekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 13th September, 2019.
_______
Notification
No. 7/8/2016-PER(PART-I)/2369
Read: Notification No. 7/8/2016-PER(PART-I)/352 dated 29-01-2019.
In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 316 of the Constitution of India, read with Regulation
5 of the Goa Public Service Commission (Members and Staff) (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1988 and
in review of the notification read in preamble, the tenure of Shri Jose Manuel Noronha, as Chairman, Goa
Public Service Commission shall be for six years, reckoned from the date he entered his office as
Chairman or until he attains the age of sixty two years, whichever is earlier.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Maya Pednekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 29th August, 2019.
———uuu———
Department of Planning
Directorate of Planning, Statistics & Evaluation
—
Order
No. DPSE/ADMN/Direct. Rec./SO/2018/1485
On the recommendation of the Goa Public
Service Commission vide their letter No. COM/II/
/11/38(1)/2018/44 dated 30-04-2019, Shri Kailas
Digambar Gokhale is hereby appointed to the post
of Statistical Officer of the Goa Statistical Cadre of
this Directorate with immediate effect on regular
basis. His pay is in the pay band of Rs. 9300-
-34800+G.P. Rs. 4600/- (pre-revised) Level 7 as per
VII Pay Commission and posted at Directorate of
Planning, Statistics & Evaluation, Porvorim. He is
entitled to draw all allowances admissible as per
rules.
The appointment of Shri Kailas Digambar
Gokhale will be on probation for a period of two years.
The appointment is subject to the condition
stipulated in the Memorandum No. DPSE/ADMN/
/Direct. Rec./SO/2018/15 dated 24-05-2019 and
corrigendum No. DPSE/ADMN/Direct. Rec./SO/
/2018/875 dated 06-06-2019.
Shri Kailas Digambar Gokhale has already been
examined medically and found fit and his character
and antecedents have been verified and found
nothing adverse.
A copy of the joining report may be submitted
to this Directorate for record.
This issues with the Government approval vide
U.O. No. 1329/F dated 05-09-2019.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dr. Y. Durga Prasad, Director & ex officio Joint
Secretary (Planning).
Porvorim, 11th September, 2019.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
390
Order
No. DPSE/1/ADMN/DEPU/4/2018/1387
Sub.: Appointment against the post of Project
Economist on deputation basis.
Shri Arjun Paik Gaonkar, Research Assistant of
the Common Statistical Cadre is hereby transferred
and posted as Project Economist on deputation
basis initially for one year in the District Rural
Development Agency, North Goa, Panaji.
He shall hold additional charge for 02 (two) days
in a week (Tuesday & Thursday) at District Rural
Development Agency, South Goa, Margao.
Shri Gaonkar stands relieved from his Directorate
w.e.f. 28-08-2019 (a.n.) so as to enable him to
join his duties on 29-08-2019 at the place of his
posting.
His period of deputation shall be as per the
standard terms and conditions of deputation
contained in O.M. No. 13/4/74/PER dated 20-11-2013
issued by the Personnel Department and as
amended from time to time.
Shri Arjun Paik Gaonkar has to submit joining
report to this Directorate for record.
This issues with the Government approval vide
U.O. No. 1718 dated 22-8-2019.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dr. Y. Durga Prasad, Director & ex officio Jt.
Secretary (Planning).
Porvorim, 28th August, 2019.
———uuu———
Department of Public Health
—
Order
No. 13/52/89-IV/PHD(Part-II)/1366
Government is pleased to re-nominate Dr. Ida de
Noronha de Ataide, Dean of Goa Dental College &
Hospital, Bambolim-Goa as a member of Dental
Council of India u/s 3(e) of the Dentists Act, 1948
to represent the Government of Goa for a period of
five years with effect from 18-07-2019 to 17-07-2024.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Trupti B. Manerkar, Under Secretary (Health-I).
Porvorim, 10th September, 2019.
Department of Revenue
—
Order
No. 21/2/Misc/II/2018-RD/2694
Sub.:-
Transaction of Land Sale/Gift, Mutation,
Power of Attorney etc. by widows.
Read: 1. Order No. 21/2/Misc./II/2018-RD/963 dated
22-05-2018.
2. Circular No. 21/2/Misc/II/2018-RD dated
04-10-2018.
3. Order No. 21/2/Misc./II/2018-RD/478 dated
20-02-2019.
4. Circular No. 21/2/Misc./II/2018-RD/2023
dated 29-05-2019.
Whereas, Government vide above read Order
No. 21/2/Misc./II/2018-RD/963 dated 22-05-2018 has
appointed the Deputy Collector/SDO’s in their
respective Sub-Divisions and the Dy. Resident
Commissioner, Goa Sadan at Delhi as the Competent
Authorities who will examine and certify the fact
that the conveyance documents and mutation of
widows’ property is not done by the widow under
coercion or undue influence in the template
suggested in the said Order.
The Government has now decided to permit the
Deputy Collector/SDOs or Deputy Resident
Commissioner, Goa Sadan to add a line in the
certificate that the ownership/title of the
concerned property has not been verified.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Sudin A. Natu, Under Secretary (Revenue-I).
Porvorim, 10th September, 2019.
———uuu———
Department of Town & Country Planning
—
Notification
No. 4-3-UDD/MLA/TCP/2012-19/2307
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4
of the Goa, Daman and Diu Town and Country
Planning Act, 1974 (Act No. 21 of 1975), read with
Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Central
Act No. 10 of 1897), the Government of Goa hereby
amends the Government Notification No. 4-3-UDD/
/MLA/TCP/2017/2841 dated 7th September, 2017,
published in the Official Gazette, Series II No. 24
dated 14-09-2017 (hereinafter referred to as the
“principal Notification”) as follows, namely:-
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
391
In the principal Notification,-
(i) in the entry against serial No. 18, for the
expression “Government of Goa”, the
expression “Government of India” shall be
substituted;
(ii) for the entry against serial No. 21, the
following entry shall be substituted, namely:-
“21. Shri Antonio P. Diniz, Cusmane, Quepem
.......... Member.”;
(iii) for the entry against serial No. 24, the
following entry shall be substituted, namely:-
“24. Chief Town Planner (Planning) … Member
Secretary.”.
This Notification shall come into force on the
date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner & ex officio
Jt. Secretary (Planning).
Panaji, 13th September, 2019.
________
Notification
No. 4-5-2-84-UDD(PT)/12/2339
In exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 20 of the Goa,
Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning Act,
1974 (Act 21 of 1975), read with Rule 3 of the Goa,
Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning
(Planning and Development Authorities) Rules,
1977 and in supersession of the Government
Notification No. 4-5-2-84-UDD(Pt)/2018/2292 dated
07-11-2018, published in the Official Gazette,
Series II No. 32 dated 08-11-2018, the Government
of Goa, hereby reconstitutes in respect of the
Vasco-da-Gama Planning Area, as declared vide
the Government Notification No. 4-5-2-84-
-UDD(Part)/05/2737 dated 27-9-2005, published in
the Official Gazette, Extraordinary No. 3, Series I
No. 25 dated 27-09-2005, read with the Government
Notification No. 4-5-2-84-UDD/Part/TCP/2013/2109
dated 28-05-2013, published in the Official Gazette,
Series I No. 9 dated 30-05-2013 and the Government
Notification No. 29/8/TCP/Sancoale/Pt/RP/2015-
-16/1175 dated 11-03-2016, published in the Official
Gazette, Series I No. 51 dated 17-03-2016, an
authority to be called the Mormugao Planning and
Development Authority consisting of the following
members, namely:-
1. Shri Clafacio Dias,
— Chairman.
Hon’ble MLA of Cuncolim
Assembly Constituency
2. Hon’ble MLA, Vasco Assembly
— Member.
Constituency
3. Hon’ble MLA, Mormugao
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
4. Hon’ble MLA, Dabolim
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
5. Hon’ble MLA, Cortalim
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
6. Chairperson, Mormugao
— Member.
Municipal Council
7. Shri Damodar Kaskar, Councilor, — Member.
Mormugao Municipal Council
8. Shri Kamla Prasad Yadav,
— Member.
Deputy Sarpanch of Chicalim-
-Dabolim Village Panchayat
9. Smt. Anita Thorat
— Member.
10. Shri Kushali J. Velip,
— Member.
Velipwada, Barcem,
Quepem-Goa
11. Shri Brian James Pereira,
— Member.
Guirdolim, Chandor, Salcete
12. Smt. Niquela Jeorgina Fernandes,— Member.
Panzorconim, Cuncolim, Salcete
13. Shri Chandrakant Gawas,
— Member.
Dabolim
14. Shri Rajan Dicholkar, Vasco
— Member.
15. Town Planning Officer
— Member
Secretary.
This Notification shall come into force on the
date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner & ex officio
Joint Secretary (Planning).
Panaji, 17th September, 2019.
________
Notification
No. 28/11/TCP/2017-19/2340
In exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 20 of the Goa,
Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning Act,
1974 (Act 21 of 1975), read with Rule 3 of the Goa,
Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning
(Planning and Development Authorities) Rules,
1977 and in supersession of the Government
Notification No. 28/11/TCP/2018/293 dated
14-02-2018, published in the Official Gazette,
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
392
Series II No. 46 dated 15-02-2018, the Government
of Goa hereby re-constitutes in respect of (i) Panaji
Planning Area declared as such vide the
Government Notification No. 28/10/TCP/2018/203
dated 31-01-2018, published in the Official Gazette,
Series I No. 44 dated 01-02-2018, (ii) Mapusa
Planning Area declared as such vide the
Government Notification No. 4-5-2-84-UDD/Pt/TCP/
/2012-15/4928 dated 09-12-2015, published in the
Official Gazette, Series I No. 38 dated 17-12-2015,
(iii) Calangute-Candolim Planning Area declared
as such vide the Government Notification
No. 4-5-2-84-UDD/pt/TCP/15/60 dated 08-01-2015,
published in the Official Gazette, Series II No. 42
dated 15-01-2015, read with the Government
Notification No. 4-5-2-84-UDD/Pt/Tcp/2016/4297
dated 18-10-2016, published in the Official Gazette,
Series II No. 29 dated 20-10-2016 and (iv) Arpora-
-Nagoa-Parra Planning Area declared as such vide
the Government Notification No. 28/10/TCP/2018/
/163 dated 24-01-2018, published in the Official
Gazette, Series III No. 43 dated 25-01-2018, an
authority to be called the North Goa Planning and
Development Authority, consisting of the following
members, namely:-
1. Shri Francisco Silveira,
— Chairman.
Hon’ble MLA of St. Andre
Assembly Constituency
2. Hon’ble MLA, Calangute
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
3. Hon’ble MLA, Taleigao
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
4. Hon’ble MLA, Panaji Assembly
— Member.
Constituency
5. Hon’ble MLA, Mapusa Assembly — Member.
Constituency
6. Hon’ble MLA, Aldona Assembly — Member.
Constituency
7. Hon’ble MLA, Siolim Assembly — Member.
Constituency
8. Hon’ble MLA, Saligao Assembly — Member.
Constituency
9. Hon’ble MLA, Thivim Assembly — Member.
Constituency
10. Mayor of Corporation of the
— Member.
City of Panaji
11. Shri Sandeep Falari, Councilor, — Member.
Mapusa Municipal Council
12. Shri Dharmandra Kandolkar,
— Member.
Panch, Calangute Village
Panchayat
13. Shri. Jitendra Ramdas Gaonkar, — Member.
Aquem, Margao-Goa
14. Smt. Alexandrinha Caetaninha — Member.
Pires, Igramall, Quepem-Goa
15. Shri Vishwas V. Gharse,
— Member.
Agassaim, Tiswadi-Goa
16. Shri Allan Silveira, Agassaim,
— Member.
Tiswadi-Goa
17. Shri Wilson Gerry Pereira,
— Member.
Agassaim, Tiswadi-Goa
18. Town Planning Officer
— Member
Secretary.
This Notification shall come into force on the
date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner & ex officio
Joint Secretary (Planning).
Panaji, 17th September, 2019.
________
Notification
No. 28/11/TCP/2019/2341
In exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 20 of the Goa,
Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning Act,
1974 (Act 21 of 1975), read with Rule 3 of the Goa,
Daman and Diu Town and Country Planning
(Planning and Development Authorities) Rules,
1977 and in supersession of the Government
Notification No. 28/11/TCP/2018/292 dated
14-02-2018, published in the Official Gazette,
Series II No. 46 dated 15-02-2018, the Government
of Goa hereby re-constitutes in respect of the
Taleigao Planning Area declared as such vide the
Government Notification No. 28/10/TCP/2018/203
dated 31-01-2018, published in the Official Gazette,
Series I No. 44 dated 01-02-2018, and the Bambolim
Planning Area, Kadamba Planning Area declared
as such vide the Government Notification
No. 28/10/TCP/2018/163 dated 24-01-2018,
published in the Official Gazette, Series III No. 43
dated 25-01-2018, read with the Government
Notification No. 28/10/TCP/2017-18/1824 dated
03-09-2018, published in the Official Gazette,
Series I No. 23 dated 06-09-2018, an authority
to be called the Greater Panaji Planning and
Development Authority consisting of the following
members, namely:-
1. Shri Atanasio J. Monserratte,
— Chairman.
Hon’ble MLA of Panaji
Assembly Constituency
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 25
19TH SEPTEMBER, 2019
393
2. Hon’ble MLA, Taleigao
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
3. Hon’ble MLA, St. Andre
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
4. Hon’ble MLA, St. Cruz
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
5. Hon’ble MLA, Cumbharjua
— Member.
Assembly Constituency
6. Sarpanch, Village Panchayat
— Member.
of Taleigao
7. Sarpanch, Village Panchayat
— Member.
of Chimbel
8. Sarpanch, Village Panchayat of — Member.
St. Cruz
9. Sarpanch, Village Panchayat of — Member.
Se Old Goa
10. Sarpanch, Village Panchayat
— Member.
of Curca-Bambolim-Talaulim
11. Shri Pundalik Raut Dessai,
— Member.
Councillor, Corporation of the
City of Panaji
12. Shri Pedro Coutinho,
— Vice-
Ex. Senior Town Planner
-Chairman.
13. Shri Filu D’Costa, Deulmol,
— Member.
Quepem-Goa
14. Shri Shiva Naik, Cumbharjua
— Member.
15. Shri Mario Fernandes, Business — Member.
16. Shri Allan Machado, Engineer
— Member.
17. Town Planning Officer
— Member
Secretary.
This Notification shall come into force on the
date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner & ex officio
Joint Secretary (Planning).
Panaji, 17th September, 2019.
www.goaprintingpress.gov.in
Published and Printed by the Director, Printing & Stationery,
Government Printing Press,
Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.
PRICE–Rs. 19.00
PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA—210/160–9/2019.