Reg. No. G-2/RNP/GOA/32/2018-20
RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410
Panaji, 28th May, 2020 (Jyaistha 7, 1942) SERIES II No. 9 PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
Note:- There are two Extraordinary issues to the Official Gazette, Series II No. 8 dated 21-05-2020 as follows:—
(1) Extraordinary dated 21-05-2020 from pages 99 to 100 regarding Orders from Department of Home.
(2) Extraordinary (No. 2) dated 26-05-2020 from pages 101 to 102 regarding Notification from Department of Finance.
And whereas, it is further reported that the society has failed to maintain the required documents while sanctioning loans to its members. This gives scope to believe that the society is sanctioning loans without obtaining the required mandatory documents to safeguard the interest of the society.
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
Department of Co-operation
Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies __
And whereas, it has also been reported that the society has taken very casual view as far as recovery of loans are concerned and thereby resulting therein huge overdues and NPA beyond permissible limit.
Order
No. 3/17/Urban Credit/TS-II/PZ/2020/RCS/320
Read: Letter No. 3/17/11-12/ARPZ/Urban/ADM/
/4030 dated 19-3-2020.
Whereas, the Mashel Mahila Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Deulwada, Marcel-Goa is a "Resource Society" deemed to be registered under the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 and Rules, 2003.
And whereas, the Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ponda Zone, Ponda-Goa has submitted a detailed report on the financial stability/non-compliance of the statutory requirements by the society.
And whereas, it is reported that the society has failed to maintain required liquidity as per the prescribed norms.
And whereas, it is observed from the said report that the society has mobilized deposits to the extent of Rs. 9,08,77,701.99 as on 31-3-2019 against which liquidity of 2.65% is maintained. As per the prescribed norms, the society is required to maintain 25% i.e. 20% investment and 5% CRR. However, the same is not found complied with.
And whereas, it is also reported that the society was failed to comply with the requirements of Section 72 of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001, thereby depriving the general members of their legitimate right to attend the meeting and participate in the business of the society.
And whereas, the above lapses appears to be of serious nature which may have an adverse effect on the financial stability of the society. Moreover, being a Resource society, it should have been endeavour of the management to comply with all the statutory requirements so as to safeguard the funds of the members parked with the society.
And whereas, the above circumstances gives wide scope to believe that if the present situation is allowed to continue further, it may encourage the management to continue with the irregularities as pointed out hereinabove and further deteriorate the financial base to an irreparable extent. Hence, it is felt expedient to take immediate action to impose certain restrictions on the loaning activities and on accepting deposits by the society.
Now therefore, I, Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Government of Goa, Patto, Panaji in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 69 of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 hereby impose the following restrictions for initial period of six months on the Mashel Mahila Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Deulwada, Marcel-Goa.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 20201. The society is banned from accepting any form of deposits of value exceeding Rs. 5000/- per person per month and also disburse any loans/advances.
2. The society shall not carry out further collection of pigmy accounts except wherein pigmy collections are adjusted against loan shall continue.
3. No fresh accounts viz. Pigmy, Saving, Current, Recurring, Fixed Deposit etc. shall be opened.
The Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ponda Zone, Ponda-Goa shall monitor and review the progress of the society on weekly basis so also ensure that the above restrictions are strictly complied with and submit the report thereof to the undersigned on fortnightly basis. Incase the society shows improvement and compliance, these restrictions will not be extended further.
The financial position shall be assessed on the basis of the report submitted by Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Ponda Zone and accordingly decide whether to relax the above restrictions or otherwise.
Vikas S. N. Gaunekar, Registrar (Co-operative
Societies).
Panaji, 18th May, 2020.
———uuu———
Department of Education, Art & Culture Department of Finance
Revenue & Control Division __ Order
No. 8/1/2016-Fin(R&C)/Part/611
Read: 1. Order No. 8/1/2016-Fin(R&C)/(B) dated
30-11-2016.
2. Order No. 8/1/2016-Fin(R&C)/Part dated
01-08-2019.
3. Order No. 8/1/2016-Fin(R&C)/Part dated
08-11-2019.
In pursuance to the order of even number dated 01-08-2019 [read at (2) above], and on account of COVID-19 Pandemic, Government is pleased to extend the period/due date of submission of revision of pension of pre-2016 Pensioners/family Pensioners cases by the Heads of Department/ /Heads of Offices to the Directorate of Accounts upto 31-07-2020 and further clearance by the Directorate of Accounts upto 31-01-2021.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Daulat A. Hawaldar, IAS, Secretary (Finance).
Porvorim, 11th May, 2020.
———uuu———
Department of Labour __
Notification
Directorate of Higher Education __
No. 28/2/2020-LAB/308
Certificate
No. ACAD III/SHEC/Filling of Posts/02/2019/ /Part II/777
Read: ACAD-III/SHEC/Filling of Posts/02/2019/Part
II/10948 dated 10-02-2020.
Certified that the character and antecedents of Dr. Mahesh Satu Majik appointed to the post of Associate Professor for Research, Development and Innovation for State Higher Education Council (Group "A" Gazetted) under Directorate of Higher Education vide above referred Order has been verified by the Addl. Collector & ADM, North, Office of the District Magistrate, North Goa, Panaji-Goa and nothing adverse has come to the notice of the Government.
Premraj K. Shirodkar, Under Secretary (Higher
Education).
Porvorim, 5th May, 2020.
The following Award passed by the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on 20-04-2020 in in reference No. IT/29/12 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, 22nd May, 2020. ______
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Vincent D'Silva, Hon'ble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/29/12 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020 Shri Ajay Naik and another, Rep. by the General Secretary, Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh, G-5, Macedo Apartments, V/s
M/s. Putz Pump (India) Pvt. Ltd., 190-191, Kundaim Industrial Estate, Kundaim, Goa (403 115). … Employer/Party II
Workmen/Party I represented by Ld. Adv. Shri S. P. Gaonkar.
Employer/Party II represented by Ld. Adv. Shri P. Chawdikar.
AWARD
(Delivered on this the 20th day of the month of April of the year 2020)
By Order dated 28-5-2012, bearing No. 28/05/2012- -LAB/764, 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 this Tribunal for adjudication.
"(1) Whether the action of the management of M/s. Putz Pump (India) Private Limited, Kundaim, Goa, in dismissing from service the following workmen, with effect from 15-12-2004, is legal and justified?
Serial No. Name of workmen Designation
1. Shri Ajay Naik Fitter. 2. Shri Rajesh Palande Electrician.
(2) If not, what relief the workmen are entitled
to?"
2. Upon receipt of the reference, IT/29/12 was registered and registered A/D notices were issued to both the parties. Upon appearance, Party I filed a Claim statement at Exhibit 4 and Party II filed a Written Statement at Exhibit 5.
3. In short, the case of Party I in the Claim statement is that the Party I workmen Shri Ajay Naik and Shri Rajesh Palande were working for the Party
II. All permanent workers formed a new union in the establishment in the year 2004 which the Party II was not in favour. The Union thereafter raised a Charter of demands and on receipt of the same, the management started harassing the office bearers of the Union and fabricated false cases only to victimize
them. The Party II suspended both the Party I workmen on the ground that they allegedly committed misconduct. The Party I workmen were the office bearers of the Union. They were not issued charge sheet nor was any notice of enquiry served
on them. The management has also not followed the principles of natural justice before their dismissal nor paid any dues in accordance with the Act. The dismissal of Party I workmen was made only to victimize them for trade union activities and hence their dismissal is illegal and unjustified.
4. In the Written statement, the Party II has claimed that the reference is bad in law. There is no existence of industrial dispute. The Party I workmen committed misconducts including disorderly behaviour, assault on or intimidation on security guard and refusal to accept communication in
accordance with the rules. A formal enquiry was conducted against the Party I workmen, however they did not participate in the enquiry though they were fully informed about the same and every conceivable opportunity was granted to attend the enquiry, however they did not attend and hence,
the Enquiry Officer had no other option but to conduct the enquiry ex-parte. The Enquiry Officer submitted the findings and the management after considering their past records of service decided to dismiss them from service. The management has followed the principles of natural justice before
termination and hence their termination is legal.
5. Based on the above averments of the respective
parties, the following issues were framed.
(1) Whether the Party I prove that they have been suspended by Party II only to victimize them as they raised the charter of demands through their union?
(2) Whether the Party I proves that the management dismissed them w.e.f. 15-12-04 as they were the office bearers of the union and had taken initiative to form the union?
(3) Whether the Party I proves that before dismissal, the management did not issue them the charge sheets or any notice of enquiry was served on them and as such the dismissal is illegal, unjustified and bad in law?
(4) Whether the Party II proves that the present dispute of the workmen is not an "industrial dispute" as defined under the I.D. Act, 1947?
(5) Whether the Party II proves that the present dispute is barredby limitation, delay and latches as it is raised several years from the date of termination?
(6) What relief? What Award?
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 20206. It is a matter of record that additional issues were framed on 24-08-2018 at Exh. 59 which were as follows:
1(A) Whether the Party I workmen were dismissed after conducting a fair and proper domestic enquiry as alleged by the Employer/Party II?
1(B) Whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer in the alleged domestic enquiry against the workmen is perverse or not?
1(C) Whether the punishment of dismissal is proportionate to the charges leveled against the workmen?
7. It is a matter of record that additional issues No. 1(A) and 1(B) were answered vide Award (Part I) dated 15-04-2019 at Exh. 62 and held that the findings of the Enquiry Officer against the Party I workmen is not fair and proper and the charges of misconduct leveled against the Party I workmen are not proved to the satisfaction of the Tribunal by acceptable evidence.
Party II dated 9-3-2011 at Exh. 83, a copy of Reg. A/D card along with envelope at Exh. 84, a copy of charge sheet to Rajesh Palande at Exh. 85, a copy of Reg. A/D card along with envelope at Exh. 86, a copy of Reg. A/D card along with envelope at Exh. 87, a copy of minutes of enquiry proceedings dated 9-12-2004 and the report of enquiry proceedings dated 14-12-2004 of Mrs. Rajesh Palande at Exh. 88. The Party II also examined Shri Sudip Prabhu Desai as second witness.
9. Heard arguments. Notes of Written arguments
came to be placed on record by Party I as well as Party II.
10. I have gone through the records of the case and have duly considered the arguments advanced. My findings to the above issues are as follows:
Issue No. 1 … Redundant.
Issue No. 2 … In the Affirmative.
Issue No. 3 … Redundant.
Issue No. 4 … In the Negative.
Issue No. 5 … In the Negative.
Issue No. 6 … As per final order.
ADDITIONAL ISSUE
Issue No. 1(C) … In the Negative.
REASONS
8. The Party I did not lead evidence on the other issues. On the other hand, the Party II examined Shri Bramh Dutt Shukla who produced on record the copy of the complaint from security guard of Party II to Police Inspector, Ponda dated 10-10-2004 at Exh. 65, a copy of charge sheet issued to Mr. Ajay Naik dated 19-11-2004 at Exh. 66, a copy of Minutes of enquiry proceedings dated 26-11-2004 at Exh. 67, a copy of report of the Enquiry Officer in the charge sheet dated 19-11-2004 issued to Mr. Ajay Naik at Exh. 68, a copy of letter of dismissal issued to Party I dated 15-12-2004 at Exh.69, a copy of letter from workers union to ALC, Ponda dated 16-12-2004 at Exh.70, a copy of letter from ALC Ponda to Party II dated 17-12-2004 at Exh.71, a copy of letter from Party II to Labour Commissioner, Panaji dated 27-12-2004 at Exh.72, a copy of letter from ALC Ponda to the President of Workers Union dated 29-12-2004 at Exh.73, a copy of minutes of the discussion held between the management and 4 workers before ALC Ponda dated 31-12-2004 at Exh.74, a copy of letter from Party II to ALC Ponda dated 25-1-2005 at Exh.75, a copy of letter from Party II to ALC Ponda dated 14-3-2005 at Exh. 76, a copy of letter from ALC Ponda to Party II dated 15-3-2005 at Exh. 77, a copy of letter from Party II to ALC Ponda dated 19-3-2005 at Exh.78, a copy of judgment passed by the Industrial Tribunal dated 27-1-2010 at Exh.79, a copy of letter from Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh to ALC Ponda dated 3-2-2011 at Exh. 80, a copy of letter from ALC Ponda to Party II dated 4-2-2011 at Exh. 81, a copy of reply from Party II to ALC Ponda dated 16-2-2011 at Exh. 82, a copy of letter from Office of ALC Ponda to Issue No. 1:
11. Admittedly, the present reference concerns
dismissal of Party I workmen namely Ajay Naik and Rajesh Palande by the Party II w.e.f. 15-12-2004 and therefore the issue No. 1 as to the suspension of the said workmen does not arise in the present reference and hence, issue No. 1 need not be answered as it is redundant.
Issue No. 2:
12. There is no dispute that the Party I workmen were dismissed from service w.e.f. 15-4-2004. It has also come on record that they were the office bearers of the union. It has been clearly held vide Award (Part I) passed on 15-4-2019 that the Party II has conducted a one day enquiry in haste and the
evidence on record does not support the charges leveled and therefore it is apparent that the employer had malice against the workers for joining the trade union and hence, it amounts to legal victimization of the workmen as rightly pointed out by Ld. Adv. S. P. Gaonkar for the Party I. Hence, the above issue is
answered in the affirmative.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020Issue No. 3:
13. The Party I claimed that before dismissal the management did not issue them the charge sheet nor the notice of enquiry was served on them and as such the dismissal is illegal, unjustified and bad in law, however, the above issue does not arise as it has been held that the findings of the Enquiry Officer against the Party I workmen is not fair and proper and the charges of misconduct leveled against the Party I workmen are not proved to the satisfaction of the Tribunal by acceptable evidence and therefore, the issue No. 3 is no longer relevant and hence it is answered accordingly.
Issue No. 4:
14. It is claimed by the Party II that the present dispute of the workmen is not an industrial dispute as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, however there cannot be any quarrel that in terms of Section 2-A(2), a dispute pertaining to the dismissal of the workmen is deemed to be an industrial dispute under the Act and therefore, the contention of the Party II that the present dispute is not an industrial dispute cannot be accepted. Hence, it is answered in the negative.
Issue No. 5:
15. The Party II has claimed that the present dispute is barred by limitation, delay and latches as it is raised several years after termination. Needless to mention, the workmen had initially made a complaint under Section 33-A of the Act wherein the Tribunal has observed that Section 33-A is not
attracted to the dismissal of the workmen. It is also an admitted fact that thereafter the workmen raised the present dispute. The time spent in pursuing the complaint under Section 33-A by the Par ty I workmen cannot be treated as delay and latches. The reference is not dependent on the dismissal of
the earlier complaint filed under Section 33-A of the Act. It is well settled in the case of management of Tingalibam Tea Estate vs. P. O. Labour Court, (2016) 1 Gauhati Law Reports 246, that provisions of Limitation Act have no application while making a reference for adjudicating an industrial dispute
between the workmen and the management and that the delay cannot be a ground for denying relief to a workman. It is also held that principles of res judicata or constructive res judicata are not attracted in industrial disputes and therefore, it cannot be said that the present dispute is barred by limitation, delay
and latches. Hence, the above issue is also answered in the negative.
Issue No. 1(C):
16. Admittedly, the Party II led evidence to prove the charges against the workmen and attempted to justify its action of dismissal of the workmen. The Party II have examined Shri Bramh Dutt Shukla, the Factory Manager and Shri Sudip V. Prabhu Desai, AGM-Accounts who had been already examined during Part-I Award. Shri Bramh Dutt has claimed that the enquiry was conducted by Shri S. R. Lotlikar, Enquiry Officer and that he is filing the affidavit on additional issues as well as other issues. He claimed that Shri Rajesh Palande was charge sheeted for having committed an act in violation of the rules and threatening the Security Guard, Shri Swapnesh Pal by saying "You come out and I will show you" which amounts to disorderly behaviour and intimidation. He also claimed that Shri Ajay Naik was also charge sheeted for the said offence and refusal to accept the communication. He claimed that the findings of the Enquiry Officer were based on the evidence. He had produced the documents at Exh. 65 to Exh. 88.
17. Interestingly, the Party II through the above two witnesses have produced and exhibited the same documents which were produced through their earlier witness, Shri Sudip V. Prabhu Desai at the time of Part-I Award from Exh. 32 to Exh. 53. The affidavit of Shri Bramh Dutt Shukla which is at Exh. 64 is verbatim to the earlier witness Shri Prabhu Desai. The evidence of Shri Sudip Prabhu Desai, the management representative in the enquiry is also verbatim to his deposition before Part-I Award. The Party II have not produced any new documents on evidence to prove the charges and justify the dismissal of the Party I workmen. Needless to mention, where domestic enquiry has been set aside, the employer is entitled to lead fresh evidence to prove the charges and if the employer does not submit fresh evidence as submitted before the dismissal, charges cannot be accepted and the enquiry must be set aside as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Neeta Kaplish v/s. P.O, Labour Court, AIR 1999 SC 698.
18. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the above case has clearly observed in Para 26 as follows: 'The record pertaining to the domestic enquiry would not constitute 'fresh evidence' as those proceedings have already been found by the Labour Court to be defective. Such record would also not constitute 'material on record', as contended by the counsel for the respondent, within the meaning of Section 11-A at the enquiry proceedings, on being found to be bad, have to be ignored altogether. The proceedings of the domestic enquiry could be, and, were, in fact, relied OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020 upon by the Management for the limited purpose of showing at the preliminary stage that the action taken against the appellant was just and proper and that full opportunity of hearing was given to her consonance with the principles of natural justice. This contention has not been accepted by the Labour Court and the enquiry has been held to be bad. In view of the nature of objections raised by the appellant, the record of enquiry held by the management ceased to be 'material on record' within the meaning of Section 11-A of the Act and the only course open to the management was to justify its action by leading fresh evidence as required by the Labour Court. If such evidence has not been led, the management has to suffer the consequences."
19. The Party II have not led any independent evidence to prove the charges other than what they have produced at the time of Part I Award. They have examined Shri Bramh Dutt Shukla and produced the same documents which have been produced earlier. He admitted in the cross examination that his office is not at the gate but in the factory premises and that he did not remember whether he was on duty on 8-10-2004. He also admitted that the factory gate is attached to the public road and that on 8-10-2004, he was not at the factory gate and that he has not witnessed any incident on that day and that he does not know whether the workers had formed a union prior to the alleged incident. He also admitted that in the Police complaint at Exh.65, name of Santosh Sakhalkar was dropped and the name of Ajay Naik was inserted. The Security Guard viz. Swapnesh Pal to whom the Party I threatened have not been examined. The whole enquiry was conducted in a haste within one day. There is no fresh evidence led by the Party II, which has already been found to be defective and therefore, the evidence led by the Party II with the same materials has to be ignored altogether. It is therefore, in such circumstances and in absence of fresh evidence, it has to be held that the dismissal of the workmen is illegal and void and the punishment is not proportionate to the charges leveled against them. Hence, the above issue is answered in the negative.
Issue No. 6:
20. Ld. Adv. Shri P. Chawdikar for the Party II has submitted that M/s. Simem India Pvt. Ltd. has not been arrayed as necessary party as Mr. Ajay Naik was employed by M/s. Simem India Pvt. Ltd. and not by Party II and that Mr. Ajay Naik was on the rolls of M/s. Simem India Pvt. Ltd. and was working for the said company. He further submitted that the charge sheet which was issued to Mr. Ajay Naik is in the name of Simem India Pvt. Ltd. and not by Party II. He further submitted that Mr. Ajay Naik has stated in the cross examination that he has been working in the company known as Hitek Products Ltd. as per the appointment letter at Exh.30 and that the company had offered him the position of electrician in their establishment w.e.f. 1-8-2005. He also submitted that Shri Rajesh Palande has also admitted in the cross examination that he is presently working in some fields on daily wage basis since December, 2004 and that he has not applied for alternate employment in any company since the date of dismissal. He further submitted that both the Party I are gainfully employed and therefore not entitled for any reliefs.
21. Per contra, Ld. Adv. Shri S. P. Gaonkar for the Party I has submitted and rightly so that Shri Bramh Dutt Shukla in his cross examination has admitted that he was the Factory Manager of Simem (India) Pvt. Ltd. and that both the factories i.e. Simem and Party II are in the same premises and that he was looking after the Simem (India) Pvt. Ltd. and that the said Simem company is closed now and the name of the company has been changed to Putz Pump (India) Pvt. Ltd. and that from 1-5-2008, all the workers who were on the rolls of Simem (India) Pvt. Ltd were absorbed by Putz Pump (India) Pvt. Ltd. with continuity of service. It therefore reveals that the employer of the Party I was the same as Simem India Pvt. Ltd. and the said fact was admitted by the Party II in the written statement as well as by Shri Bramh Dutt in the cross examination. Moreover, it is admitted that the Simem (India) Pvt. Ltd. which is part and parcel of Party II had signed a Settlement dated 20-5-2005 and the absorption letters of all the workmen of Simem India Pvt. Ltd. signed by the witness, Shri Shukla has been produced at Exh. 15 and therefore, the contention of Adv. Shri Chawdikar that Mr. Ajay Naik cannot claim any relief from Party II as he was never the employee of Party II cannot be accepted having any merits.
22. It is also well settled law in the case of Novartis India Ltd. vs. West Bengal, (2009) 3 SCC 124 that merely because the dismissal from service has been held to be illegal, it would not result in automatic payment of back wages. It is also held in the case of M. L. Singla vs. Punjab National Bank, reported in 2018 SC, 4668 that in order to claim back wages, it was necessary to the appellant to plead and prove that he was not gainfully employed after his dismissal with the aid of evidence and that 50% back wages would be just and proper. Admittedly, Shri Ajay Naik has been working in the company called Hitek Brass Products Ltd. as per the appointment letter at Exh. 30 w.e.f. 1-8-2005. There is nothing on record that Shri Ajay has tendered OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020 resignation from said Hiteck Brass Products Ltd. from the position of electrician. It therefore shows that Shri Ajay Naik was gainfully employed in the establishment of Hitek Brass Products Ltd. since 1-8-2005. He is therefore not entitled for reinstatement. There is nothing on record nor it is the case of Shri Ajay Naik that his emoluments are less than what he was drawing when he was working with the Party II. There is also no dispute that Shri Ajay Naik was dismissed from service w.e.f. 15-12-2004 and that he was gainfully employed w.e.f 1-8-2005. He is therefore entitled for 50% back wages from his date of dismissal i.e. 15-12-2004 to 31-07-2005 i.e. for a period of 7½ months.
(iv) The Party II is directed to reinstate Shri Rajesh Palande in service with 50% back wages, continuity in services and consequential benefits attached to the post to which he was working at the time of the retrenchment.
(v) 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.
(vi) Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/- (Vincent D'Silva) Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court.
———uuu———
Department of Law & Judiciary
Law (Establishment) Division __
Order
23. Shri Rajesh Palande was also dismissed w.e.f. 15-12-2004. There is nothing on record that he is also gainfully employed like Ajay Naik. He has however admitted that he is presently working on daily wage basis in fields since December, 2004. It cannot be termed as gainful employment. The Party II has not produced any documents that Shri Rajesh Palande has been employed or secured better permanent employment elsewhere. The Party I have proved that the termination of the services of Shri Rajesh Palande is illegal and without following the principles of natural justice. It is also well settled that in case of Deepali Gundu Survase v/s Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidhalaya and Ors, 2014 II CLR 813 that in case of refusal or termination, reinstatement and back wages is a normal rule. The Party I having proved that the employer terminated the services of Rajesh illegally and it is motivated and that the employer has taken away his right to work, contrary to the relevant law and has deprived him of the earnings, Party I, Shri Rajesh Palande is entitled for the reliefs of reinstatement in service with 50% back wages, continuity in services and consequential benefits attached to the post to which he was working, which would be just, proper and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, the above point is answered accordingly.
24. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The reference stands partly allowed.
(ii) It is hereby held that the action of the management of M/s. Putz Pump (India) Private Limited, Kundaim, Goa, in dismissing from service the Party I workmen, with effect from 15-12-2004, is illegal and unjustified.
(iii) Consequently, Shri Ajay Naik shall be paid 50% back wages from date of his dismissal i.e. 15-12-2004 to 31-07-2005 i.e. for a period of 7½ months.
No. 12/22/2019-LD(Estt)/849
On the recommendation of the Departmental Selection Committee of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay conveyed to Government of Goa by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay at Goa vide letter No. HCB/GOA/CJJD & JMFC/CONF-98/2019 dated 20-12-2019 with the approval of the Appointing Authority and upon acceptance by the selected candidates of the terms and conditions of appointment as specified vide Memorandum No. 12/22/2019/LD(Estt.)/246-251 dated 03-02-2020, the Government of Goa in pursuance of Rule 4, read with sub-rule 4(b) of Rule 6 of 'The Goa Judicial Service Rules, 2013' hereby appoints the following selected candidates to the post of Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class (Group A Post), in the Pay Scale of Rs. 27700-770- -33090-920-40450-1080-44770/- and other allowances, as admissible under the Rules with effect from the date he/she assumes the charge of the post.
Sr. Name of the selected candidate
No.
1. Miss Ankita Ramesh Nagvenkar. 2. Miss Queency D'Silva. 3. Mr. Waseem Hussain Rizvi. 4. Miss Smita Ulhas Sail. 5. Miss Manashree Mohan Naik. 6. Miss Shabnam Pratap Nagvekar.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020The selected candidates at Sr. No. 1 to 6 for the post of Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class (Group A Post) in the State of Goa, have been declared medically fit by the Goa Medical Board and their character and antecedents have been verified in terms of SR 196.
The apointees shall be on probation for the period of two years which may be extended by the
Appointing Authority.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Amir Y. Parab, Under Secretary (Estt.).
Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/29/2016-PER/3353 dated 29-11-2019 granting extension in service beyond superannuation to Shri P. B. Seldarkar, Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Altinho, Panaji-Goa for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-12-2019 to 30-11-2020.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Maya Pednekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020.
______
Order
Porvorim, 20th May, 2020.
———uuu———
Department of Personnel __
No. 13/30/2016/PER/1191
Order
No. 13/29/2016/PER/1190
Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/29/2016-
-PER/3353 dated 29-11-2019 was pleased to grant extension in services to Shri P. B. Seldarkar, Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Altinho, Panaji-Goa beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-12-2019 to 30-11-2020 in public interest subject to vigilance
clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;
And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted Vigilance Clearance stating that, no Disciplinary Proceedings/Vigilance cases are pending or being contemplated against Shri P. B.
Seldarkar. However, there are complaints filed against Shri Seldarkar and the matters are under enquiry and not reached final conclusion;
And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400072398 dated 15-04-2020 concurred the proposal for grant of extension to Shri P. B.
Seldarkar, Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Altinho, Panaji-Goa subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;
And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXVIth meeting held on 13-05-2020 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service
beyond superannuation to Shri P. B. Seldarkar, Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Altinho, Panaji-Goa for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-12-2019 to 30-11-2020;
Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/30/2016- -PER/3909 dated 31-12-2019 was pleased to grant extension in services to Shri Deelip M. Dhavalikar, Superintending Engineer posted as Chief General Manager on deputation in Sewerage & Infrastructural Development Corporation of Goa Limited for a period of one year beyond the age of his superannuation w.e.f. 01-01-2020 to 31-12-2020 in public interest subject to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;
And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted Vigilance Clearance stating that, no Disciplinary Proceedings/Vigilance cases are pending or being contemplated against Shri Deelip M. Dhavalikar;
And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400072320 dated 15-04-2020 concurred the proposal for grant of extension to Shri Deelip M. Dhavalikar, Superintending Engineer posted as Chief General Manager on deputation in Sewerage & Infrastructural Development Corporation of Goa Limited subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;
And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXVIth meeting held on 13-05-2020 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service beyond superannuation to Shri Deelip M. Dhavalikar, Superintending Engineer posted as Chief General Manager on deputation in Sewerage & Infrastructural Development Corporation of Goa Limited for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-01-2020 to 31-12-2020;
Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/30/2016-PER/3909 dated 31-12-2019 granting extension in service beyond superannuation to Shri Deelip M. Dhavalikar, OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020 Superintending Engineer posted as Chief General Manager on deputation in Sewerage & Infrastructural Development Corporation of Goa Limited for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-01-2020 to 31-12-2020.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Maya Pednekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020. ______
And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXVIth meeting held on 13-05-2020 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service beyond superannuation to Shri Mahesh V. Vengurlekar, Principal, Goa College of Art, Altinho, Panaji-Goa beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-12-2019 to 31-05-2020.
Order
No. 13/27/2016/PER/1194
Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/27/2016-PER/3351 dated 29-11-2019 granting extension in service beyond superannuation to Shri Mahesh V. Vengurlekar, Principal, Goa College of Art, Altinho, Panaji-Goa beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-12-2019 to 31-05-2020.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Maya Pednekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020. ______
Order
Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/27/2016- -PER/3351 dated 29-11-2019 was pleased to grant extension in services to Shri Mahesh V. Vengurlekar, Principal, Goa College of Art, Altinho, Panaji-Goa beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-12-2019 to 31-05-2020 in public interest subject to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;
And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted Vigilance Clearance stating that, no Disciplinary Proceedings/Vigilance cases are
pending or being contemplated against Shri Mahesh V. Vengurlekar;
And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400072524 dated 25-04-2020 concurred the proposal for grant of extension to Shri Mahesh V. Vengurlekar, Principal, Goa College of Art,
Altinho, Panaji-Goa subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;
No. 5/17/2019-PER/1215
On recommendation of the Goa Service Board and with the approval of the Government, Smt. Asha Harmalkar, Junior Scale Officer of Goa Civil Service is posted as Dy. Director (Admn.), DoIT, with immediate effect, in public interest.
Smt. Harmalkar shall also hold the additional charge of the post of Dy. Director (Admn.), Directorate of Printing & Stationery.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 21st May, 2020.
________
Memorandum
No. 6/4/2020-PER/1180
Read: (1) Memorandum No. 6/4/2016-PER dated 28-06-2016.
(2) Order No. 6/11/2017/2616-PER dated 23-10-2018.
(3) Order No. 6/11/2017-PER/1662 dated 14-06-2019.
(4) Order No. 6/11/2017-PER/1169 dated 15-05-2020.
Whereas, the final seniority of Junior Administrative Grade (JAG) Officers of Goa Civil Service was
issued vide Memorandum dated 28-06-2016 cited in preamble at Sl. No. 1;
And whereas, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee held on 15-10-2018 conveyed by the Goa Public Service Commission for promotion to the post of Junior Administrative Grade, 25 Senior Scale Officers were promoted to the post of Junior Administrative Grade in Level 12 of CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 under Rule 32 of Goa Civil Service Rules, 2016 vide Order dated 23-10-2018 read at Sr. No. 2 in the preamble;
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020And whereas, in the review DPC held on 29-05-2019 and 11-05-2020, officers at Sr. No. 8, 27 and 19 were promoted in the order of their merit with due regard to the seniority within their respective grading vide order dated 14-06-2019 and 15-05-2020 read at Sr. No. 3 and 4 respectively in the preamble;
And now therefore, in accordance with their ranking of the select list prepared and conveyed by the Commission vide DPC minutes from time to time, the tentative seniority of the Junior Administrative Grade Officers is drawn as follows:
Sr. Name of the Officer Date of birth Date of Date of Date of Remarks
No. appointment appointment appointment
in Junior in Senior in JAG
Scale Scale
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Shri Gurudas P. Pilarnekar 06-11-1964 11-04-2003 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
2. Smt. Shabari Manjrekar 09-12-1964 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
@ Ruhi Redkar
3. Shri Meghanath P. Porob 13-05-1968 11-04-2003 10-04-2017 23-10-2018 —
4. Shri Venancio Furtado 18-05-1966 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
5. Shri Narayan V. Prabhudessai 26-06-1962 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
6. Shri Derrik P. Neto 19-03-1967 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
7. Shri Srinet N. Kotwale 13-05-1979 25-07-2003 10-04-2017 23-10-2018 —
8. Shri Dipak Dessai 16-02-1968 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 14-06-2019 —
9. Shri V. P. Dangui 27-09-1973 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
10. Shri Dipak M. Bandekar 12-03-1967 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
11. Shri Vikas S. N. Gaunekar 21-08-1967 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
12. Smt. Deepali D. Naik 18-07-1968 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
13. Shri Raju V. Gawas 25-12-1969 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
14. Shri Anthony J. D'Souza 08-01-1973 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
15. Smt. Sandhya S. Kamat 15-07-1965 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
16. Shri Damodar S. Morajkar 22-03-1967 12-09-2006 10-04-2017 23-10-2018 —
17. Smt. Laura Britto e Madre 28-05-1964 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
Deus
18. Smt. Irene Vitoria Sequeira 12-04-1962 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
19. Shri Shivaji Dessai 15-06-1961 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 15-05-2020 —
20. Shri Vassudev N. Shetye 06-09-1971 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
21. Shri Rajendra D. Mirajkar 08-11-1964 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
22. Shri R. K. Satardekar 12-07-1969 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
23. Smt. Sneha S. Morajkar 21-09-1961 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
24. Shri Pravin M. S. Barad 20-05-1963 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
25. Shri Ashok V. Rane 13-07-1961 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
26. Smt. Upasana Mazgaonkar 01-07-1971 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
27. Shri Prashant Shirodkar 08-05-1967 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 14-06-2019 —
28. Shri Sanjeev C. Gauns Dessai 14-06-1970 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 —
The seniority shall be subject to review DPCs, if any, pursuant to the order of Hon'ble High Court dated 12-04-2017, in WP No. 1089/2016.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020All the Junior Administrative Grade Officers of Goa Civil Service from Sr. No. 01 onwards are requested to scrutinize the list and in case they have any objections as regards to seniority assigned, they shall intimate in writing to the undersigned on or before 01-06-2020. Objections received thereafter, shall not be entertained.
Shashank V. Thakur, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020.
———uuu———
Order
Department of Public Health __
No. 7/1/2001-I/PHD(Part-I)/920
Order
No. 44/28/2017-I/PHD/905
Government is pleased to transfer the following Medical Officers under Directorate of Health Services and post them at the places indicated in Col. No. 4 against their names with immediate effect, until further orders:-
Sr. Name of the Present place Proposed No. Medical Officer of posting transfer at
1 2 3 4
1. Dr. Jose M. Tavares, PHC, CHC, Canacona
Medical Officer Balli vice Dr. Shaba Gaonkar trans- ferred.
On the recommendation of Goa Public Service
Commission as conveyed vide letter No. COM/II/ /12/54(2)/2020/481 dated 05-05-2020, the Government is pleased to declare satisfactory completion of probation period of two years of Smt. Nilima V. Mishal, Senior Scientific Officer (Drugs) under Directorate of Food & Drugs Administration
and to confirm her in the said post with effect from the date of her completion of probation period.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Swati A. Dalvi, Under Secretary (Health-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020. ______
Order
2. Dr. Shaba Gaonkar, CHC, PHC, Balli vice Medical Officer Canacona Dr. Jose M.
Tavares trans- ferred.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Swati A. Dalvi, Under Secretary (Health).
Porvorim, 14th May, 2020.
________
No. 13/25/2002-I/PHD/921
On the recommendation of Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/ /II/11/56(2)/07/480 dated 05-05-2020, the Government is pleased to promote Smt. Prarthana
Order
No. 7/1/2001-I/PHD(Part-I)/919
On the recommendation of Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide letter No. COM/II/ /12/54(1)/2020/482 dated 05-05-2020, the Government is pleased to declare satisfactory completion of probation period of two years of Shri Chandrakant R. Kambli, Senior Scientific Officer (Food) under Directorate of Food & Drugs Administration and to confirm him in the said post with effect from the date of his completion of probation period.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Swati A. Dalvi, Under Secretary (Health-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020.
D. Kamat, Assistant Chemist (Drugs) in the Directorate of Food & Drugs Administration to the post of Chemist (Drugs) (Group 'B' Non-Gazetted) in the Level 6 of Pay Matrix [PB-2 Rs. 9300-34800 plus Grade Pay Rs. 4200/- (pre-revised)] on regular basis with immediate effect.
The above Officer shall be on probation for a
period of two years from the date of joining.
The promotion is made against the vacancy occurred due to the promotion of Smt. Medha S. Tarcar to the post of Junior Scientific Officer (Drugs) in the Directorate of Food & Drugs
Administration.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Swati A. Dalvi, Under Secretary (Health-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020Order
Order
No. 13/25/2002-I/PHD/922
On the recommendation of Goa Public Service
Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/ /II/11/56(2)/07/480 dated 05-05-2020, the Government is pleased to promote Shri Pundalik Shankar Gawade, Assistant Chemist (Food) in the Directorate of Food & Drugs Administration to the post of Chemist (Food) (Group 'B' Non-Gazetted) in
the Level 6 of Pay Matrix [PB-2 Rs. 9300-34800 plus Grade Pay Rs. 4200/- (pre-revised)] on regular basis with immediate effect.
The above Officer shall be on probation for a
period of two years from the date of joining.
The promotion is made against the vacancy
occurred due to the retirement on superannuation of Smt. Effie Monteiro, Chemist (Food) in the Directorate of Food & Drugs Administration.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
No. 4/14/2003-II/PHD/Vol.IX/1078
On the recommendation of the Goa Public
Service Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/12/30(2)/06/483 dated 05-05-2020, the Government is pleased to declare Dr. Clarista Meleena Quadros, Assistant Lecturer in the Department of Anatomy, Goa Medical College as having satisfactorily completed her probation
period of two years w.e.f. 06-09-2017 to 05-09-2019, and to confirm her in the post of Assistant Lecturer in the Department of Anatomy in Goa Medical College, Bambolim, with effect from the date of completion of her probation period.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Trupti B. Manerkar, Under Secretary (Health).
Porvorim, 19th May, 2020.
________
Notification
Swati A. Dalvi, Under Secretary (Health-II).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020.
________
No. 9/1/2018-III/PHD/1065
Order
No. 4/1/2003-II/PHD/Vol.I/1072
On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/11/30(4)/14/484 dated 05-05-2020, Government is pleased to promote Dr. Siddhesh Prakash Prabhu, Lecturer to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Anatomy in Goa Medical College and Hospital, Bambolim on regular
basis in the Level 11 of Pay Matrix and other allowances to be fixed as per rules with immediate effect.
The promotion is made against the vacancy occurred due to the promotion of Dr. Rajani Dubhashi to the post of Associate Professor in the
Department of Anatomy vide Order No. 4/25/2002- -II/PHD(Part) dated 12-02-2007 and subsequently revived vide Order No. 4/1/2018-II/PHD/1194 dated 14-08-2019.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Trupti B. Manerkar, Under Secretary (Health).
Porvorim, 19th May, 2020.
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 45 read with Section 46 of the Mental Health Care Act, 2017 (Central Act 10 of 2017) read with Rule 3 of the Mental Healthcare (State Mental Health Authority) Rules, 2018, the Government of Goa hereby establishes the Goa State Mental
Health Authority consisting of the following members, namely:-
1. Principal Secretary/Secretary — Chairperson (Health) ex officio.
2. Additional Secretary/ — Member
/Joint Secretary (Health) ex officio.
3. Director of Health Services — Member
ex officio.
4. Director of Social Welfare — Member
ex officio.
5. Additional Secretary/ — Member
/Joint Secretary (Home) ex officio.
6. Additional Secretary/ — Member
/Joint Secretary (Finance) ex officio.
7. Additional Secretary/ — Member
/Joint Secretary (Law) ex officio.
8. Professor and Head of — Member
Department of Psychiatry ex officio. (IPHB) OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020 9. Dr. Abhijit Nadkarni — Non-Official
Member.
10. Dr. Gnnanaprakasham — Non-Official
Member.
11. Smt. Deepali Naik — Non-Official
Member.
12. Nitasha Bohra — Non-Official
Member.
13. Smt. Yamuna Gurudas — Non-Official
Pangam Member.
14. Amanda Rodrigues — Non-Official
Member.
15. Prashanti Talpankar — Non-Official
Member.
16. Dr. Peter Castelino (COOJ) — Non-Official
Member.
17. Mrs. Maryann Lobo D'mello — Non-Official (KALLJI) Member.
18. Dr. Ravindra Agarwal — Non-Official
(ANTARMAN) Member.
19. Jinu J. Puliyampalliy — Non-Official
(CHAITANYA) Member.
No. 4-5-2-84-UDD(PT)/12/2339 dated 17-09-2019,
published in the Official Gazette, Series II No. 25 dated 19-09-2019 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Notification") as follows, namely:-
In the said Notification, for the entry against serial No. 9, the following entry shall be substituted, namely:-
"9. Shri Narayan Naik
Member of Village Panchayat — Member."
of Sancoale
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, 22nd May, 2020.
———uuu———
Department of Transport
Directorate of Transport __
Notification
This Notification shall come into force on the
date of it's publication in Official Gazette.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Trupti B. Manerkar, Under Secretary (Health-I).
Porvorim, 18th May, 2020.
———uuu———
Department of Town & Country Planning __
No. D.Tpt/EST/1452/293/2020/1167
Read: Notification No. D.Tpt/EST/1452/203/2014/
/396 dated 31-01-2014.
In partial modification to the Notification No.
D.Tpt/EST/1452/203/2014/396 dated 31-01-2014,
Government is pleased to amend sub-clause (iv) of
Clause 9 of Notification No. D.Tpt/EST/1452/2001/
/1339 dated 19-09-2001 of the Goa State Subsidy
for Replacement of old Passenger Buses Scheme,
2001 as follows:-
Notification
No. 4-5-2-84-UDD(Pt)/2012-19/919
In exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-section (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 Section 21 of the General Clauses Act,
1897 (Act No. 10 of 1897), the Government of Goa hereby amends the Government Notification iv) Shri Caetano Xavier, — Member.
Vaddem, near Merces Chapel,
Vasco-da-Gama, Goa
Representative of Bus Owners
Association
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Rajan Satardekar, Director & ex officio Addl.
Secretary (Transport).
Panaji, 21st May, 2020.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 9 28TH MAY, 2020Department of Water Resources
Office of the Chief Engineer
__
Order
No. 3/25-4/87/CE-WRD/Adm.I/167
On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide confidential letter No. COM/II/11/27(2)/2020/478 dated 04-05-2020, Government is pleased to order the promotion of Foreman (Agriculture) to the post of Soil Survey In-charge (SSI) in Water Resources Department on regular basis in the Pay Matrix Level No. 6 with immediate effect and posted as indicated below:
Sr. Name of promotee Present designation and Designation and place Remarks No. place of posting of posting on promotion
1 2 3
4
5 1. Shri Jairam U. G. Foreman (Agriculture), Soil Survey In-charge (SSI), Promotion.
Dessai O/o the Executive Engineer, O/o the Superintending Engineer,
Works Division-XIV, W.R.D., Circle-IV, W.R.D., Gogal, Rawandfond, Navelim, Margao-Goa thereby relieving Salcete-Goa Smt. Kameshwari Raikar, Soil Survey
In-charge posted on deputation to WRD
The officer shall be on probation for a period of two years as specified in the column No. 10 of the Recruitment Rules notified in the Official Gazette, Series I No. 18 dated 01-08-2019.
This is issued vide Government approval No. 2904/F dated 18-05-2020.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
S. D. Patil, Chief Engineer & ex officio Addl. Secretary (WR).
Porvorim, 22nd May, 2020.
________
Order
No. 3/25-4/87/CE-WRD/Adm.I/168
On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide confidential letter No. COM/II/11/27(1)/2020/477 dated 04-05-2020, Government is pleased to order the promotion of Foreman (Agriculture) to the post of Water Management Specialist (WMS) in Water Resources Department on regular basis in the Pay Matrix Level No. 6 with immediate effect and posted as indicated below:
Sr. Name of promotee Present designation and Designation and place Remarks No. place of posting of posting on promotion
1 2 3
4
5 1. Shri Shivanand Foreman (Agriculture), Water Management Specialist (WMS), Promotion.
G. Naik Gaonkar O/o the Executive Engineer, O/o the Superintending Engineer,
Works Division-V, W.R.D., Circle-IV, W.R.D., Gogal,
Karapur, Tisk Margao-Goa
The officer shall be on probation for a period of two years as specified in the column No. 10 of the Recruitment Rules notified in the Official Gazette, Series I No. 18 dated 01-08-2019.
This is issued vide Government approval No. 2903/F dated 18-05-2020.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
S. D. Patil, Chief Engineer & ex officio Addl. Secretary (WR).
Porvorim, 22nd May, 2020.