Panaji, 20th October, 2022 (Asvina 28, 1944)
SERIES II No. 29
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410
Reg. No. RNP/GOA/32/2021-2023
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
Department of Archives
Directorate of Archives & Archaeology
–––
Order
No. 1/3/2016/Bifurc-A&A/DAA-1456
1. Directorate of Archives and Archaeology was
bifurcated by the Government vide approval
in the XXXIXth Cabinet meeting held on
22-05-2013 into “Directorate of Archives” and
“Directorate of Archaeology” but it was not
notified.
2. In
Xth
Cabinet
meeting
held
on
03-07-2017, Government amended the
decision redesignating “Directorate of
Archives” to “Department of Archives” and
“Directorateof Archaeology” to “Department
of Archaeology”.
3. With the approval of High Level Empowered
Committee vide Order No. 9/10/HLEC/2018-
-ARD-237 dated 16-08-2018 conveyed by the
Department of Administrative Reforms, the
sanctioned strength of Directorate of Archives
and Archaeology notified in Official Gazette,
Series I No. 25 dated 20-09-2018 is as shown
in Annexure I.
Note:- There are three Extraordinary issues to the
Official Gazette, Series II No. 28 dated 13-10-2022
as follows:—
(1) Extraordinary dated 14-10-2022 from pages 2339
to 2342 regarding Orders from Department of
Home.
(2) Extraordinary (No. 2) dated 18-10-2022 from
pages 2343 to 2344 regarding Order from Goa
State Election Commission.
3) Extraordinary (No. 3) dated 19-10-2022 from
pages 2345 to 2346 regarding Order from Goa
State Election Commission.
4. The post of Dy. Director (Admin.), Archaeology
Department was created with the approval of
the Cabinet held on 04-08-2016 by circulation
as conveyed by General Administration
Department vide letter No. 1/31/2016-GAD-II
dated 05-08-2016.
5. General
Administration
Department,
Government of Goa notified the amended rules
of the Business of the Government of Goa
(Allocation) Rules, 1987, for Department of
Archaeology and Department of Archives vide
Notification No. 23/1/87-GA&C(Vol.II)/444
dated 06-01-2019.
6. Finance (Budget) Department has created
Budget Head “87” for Department of
Archaeology and Budget Head “45” has been
allocated to Department of Archives.
7. Consequent upon creation of Department of
Archives, the staff/posts indicated at Annexure
“II”, drawing their salary under the Budget
Head “45” shall stand transferred from the
Directorate of Archives and Archaeology to
Department of Archives.
8. Consequent upon creation of Department of
Archaeology, the staff/posts indicated at
Annexure “III”, drawing their salary under the
Budget Head “87” shall stand transferred from
the Directorate of Archives and Archaeology
to Department of Archaeology.
9. The Ministerial Staff/posts indicated at
Annexure “III”, drawing their salary under the
Budget Head “45” shall stand transferred from
the Directorate of Archives and Archaeology
to Department of Archaeology and the
transferred staff shall be eligible for promotion/
/selection based upon their seniority for the
higher posts of Administrative/Accounts
section in the Department of Archaeology.
10. Director of Archives shall be the DDO for
Department of Archives and Director of
2347
Suggestions are welcomed on e-mail: [email protected]
2348
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
Archaeology shall be the DDO for Department
of Archaeology.
11. Department of Archaeology shall function from
the Head Office of Department of Archives till
Department of Archaeology acquires new
office premises.
12. The Non-Ministerial posts for administrative
and financial matters shall be created by
Department of Archaeology.
13. Smt. Gauri B. Gaude, LDC and Shri Gurudas
Naik, Accounts Clerk of Account Section of
Department of Archives shall be deployed to
Department of Archaeology till the new posts
in Accounts and Administration Section of
Department of Archaeology is created.
14. Assets and Liabilities–The assets like
furniture, cupboards, computers etc. may be
transferred to Department of Archaeology after
the notification of bifurcation.
15. Separate Orders shall be issued for the aspects
not included in this Notification in respect of
bifurcation of Directorate of Archives and
Archaeology.
16. These Orders shall come into force from the
date of issue.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Menino D’Souza, IAS, Secretary (Archives and
Archaeology).
Porvorim, 30th September, 2022.
———
ANNEXURE-I
With the approval of High Level Empowered
Committee vide Order No. 9/10/HLEC/2018-ARD-
237 dated 16-08-2018 by the Department of
Administrative Reforms, the sanctioned strength of
Directorate of Archives and Archaeology is as
follows:-
Sr.
Designation Pay Scale Sanctioned
No.
of the post
strength
1
2
3
4
Non-Ministerial (Non-Lapsable) Posts
1.
Director
PB-3 Pay Matrix
1
Level-12
2.
Dy. Director
PB-3 Pay Matrix
1
(Archives &
Level-10
Archaeology)
3.
Archivist
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
(General)
Level-7
4.
Archivist
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
(Management)
Level-7
5.
Archivist
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
(Publication)
Level-7
6.
Assistant
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Superintending Level-7
Archaeologist
7.
Scientific Officer PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Level-7
8.
Librarian
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Level-6
9.
Exploration
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Officer
Level-6
10. Assistant
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Chemist
Level-6
11. Assistant Archi- PB-2 Pay Matrix
4
vist Grade I
Level-6
12. Assistant Archi- PB-2 Pay Matrix
7
vist Grade II
Level-5
13. Information
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Officer
Level-6
14. Assistant Pro-
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
gramming Officer
Level-6
15. Accountant
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Level-6
16. Exploration
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Assistant
Level-5
17. Conservation
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Assistant
Level-5
18. Transcriber of
PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
Records
Level-5
19. Horticulture
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Assistant
Level-5
20. Assistant
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Photographer
Level-5
21. Photographer
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-5
22. Preservation
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Assistant
Level-5
23. Assistant
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Librarian
Level-5
24. Laboratory
PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
Assistant
Level-4
25. Library
PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
Assistant
Level-4
Ministerial (Lapsable) Posts
26. Head Clerk
PB-2 Pay Matrix
1
Level-6
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2349
27. Jr. Stenographer PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-4
28. U.D.C.
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-4
29. Storekeeper
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-4
30. Account Clerk
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-4
31. Record Clerk
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-4
32. L.D.C.
PB-1 Pay Matrix
17
Level-2
33. Sorter
PB-1 Pay Matrix
13
Level-2
34. Marathi Typist
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-2
35. Receptionist
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-2
36. Sr. Binder
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
(Foreman)
Level-2
37. Binder
PB-1 Pay Matrix
12
Level-2
38. Driver
PB-1 Pay Matrix
3
Level-2
39. Library Attendant PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
(Multi Tasking
Level-1
Staff)
40. Attendant (Multi PB-1 Pay Matrix
5
Tasking Staff)
Level-1
41. Record Attendant PB-1 Pay Matrix
23
(Multi Tasking
Level-1
Staff)
42. Record Lifter
PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
(Multi Tasking Level-1
Staff)
43. Monument
PB-1 Pay Matrix
5
Attendant
Level-1
(Multi Tasking
Staff)
44. Archaeology
PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
Attendant
Level-1
(Multi Tasking
Staff)
45. Gardener (Multi
PB-1 Pay Matrix
2
Tasking Staff)
Level-1
46. Peon (Multi
PB-1 Pay Matrix
5
Tasking Staff)
Level-1
47. Sweeper
PB-1 Pay Matrix
3
Level-1
48. Farash
PB-1 Pay Matrix
1
Level-1
49. Watchman
PB-1 Pay Matrix
4
Level-1
Total
145
a.
As per the recommendation and approval of
the High Level Empowered Committee
(H.L.E.C.), the following posts shall stand
abolished upon superannuation/retirement of
the incumbent or upon the posts falling vacant
(for whatever reasons).
Sr. Designation of the Post
Name of the official
No. Ministerial (Lapsable) Posts
holding the post
1
2
3
1.
Farash
Smt. Shali Gaunso.
2.
Sweeper Shri Dina Naik.
3.
Sweeper
Smt. Rajani Naik.
4.
Sweeper
Smt. Mumtaj Begaum
Mehboobsab Sanji.
5.
Watchman
Shri Ramdas Kankonkar.
6.
Watchman
Shri Sitaram Divkar.
7.
Watchman
Shri Laxman Bhosle.
8.
Watchman Vacant.
————
ANNEXURE-II
List of the posts/staff to be transferred from Directorate of Archives and Archaeology to Department
of Archives, Panaji-Goa.
Sr. No.
Name of the official
Designation
Gazetted/Non-Gazetted
Pay Scale
1
2
3
4
5
1.
—
Director
Gazetted
PB-3, Level-12
2.
—
Dy. Director
Gazetted
PB-3, Level-10
3.
Smt. Blossom Medeira
Archivist (General)
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-7
4.
Dr. Vasu M. Usapkar
Archivist
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-7
(Management)
2350
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
5.
Smt. Gayatri G. Ghatwal
Scientific Officer
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-7
6.
Shri Balaji S. Shenvy
Archivist
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-7
(Publication)
7.
—
Librarian
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
8.
Kum. Saili G. Bhonsle
Assistant Chemist
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
9.
Shri Iris Joao Filomeno Pereira
Assistant Archivist Gr-I
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
10.
Shri Shradhanand Valvaikar
Assistant Archivist Gr-I
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
11.
Smt. Kruttika K. Sawant
Assistant Archivist Gr-I
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
12.
—
Assistant Archivist Gr-I
Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
13.
Shri Shrinivas B. Naik
Head Clerk
Non-Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
14.
Smt. Pranjali P. Polle
Accountant
Non-Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
15.
Shri Rajiv P. Kudke
Asstt. Prog. Officer
Non-Gazetted
PB-2, Level-7
16.
Shri Shivdas V. Gaude
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
17.
—
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
18.
Kum. Joy Jennifer Coelho
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
19.
—
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
20.
Shri Mahesh R. Kalangutkar
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
21.
—
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
22.
—
Assistant Archivist Gr-II
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
23.
Shri Girish G. Mavlankar
Transcriber of Records
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
24.
Smt. Bindiya M. Dessai
Transcriber of Records
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
25.
Smt. Neha C. Gawas
Jr. Stenographer
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
26.
Shri Sushant C. Gawas
Assistant Photographist
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
27.
Shri Pandurang R. Naik
Storekeeper
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
28.
Shri Gurudas L. Naik
Account Clerk
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
29.
Shri Yesso P. Naik
U.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
30.
Shri Shantaram R. Gaude
Record Clerk
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
31.
Shri Pio Abel D’ Souza
Preservation Assistant
Non-Gazetted
PB-2, Level-7
32.
Smt. Sandhya J. Bhandankar
Assistant Librarian
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
33.
Smt. Sulaksha B. Dhulapkar
Library Assistant
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
34.
—
Library Assistant
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
35.
Smt. Tejeswini S. Divkar
Laboratory Assistant
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
36.
Miss Vrinda N. Parwar
Laboratory Assistant
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-4
37.
Smt. Seema R. S. Kukalayenkar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
38.
Shri Bhaskar G. Naik
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
39.
Shri Rohidas K. Kurtikar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
40.
Shri Harichandra A. Pokle
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
41.
Smt. Shikha N. Bhagat
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
42.
Smt. Gauri B. Gaude
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
43.
Smt. Neha V. S. Dangui
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
44.
Smt. Vidhya D. Gaude
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
45.
Smt. Shintija S. Naik
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
46.
Shri Mahadev Phadte
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
47.
Shri Clive Mack D’Mello
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
48.
Smt. Shilpa R. Sinari Gaonkar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2351
49.
Shri Amay S. Parsekar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
50.
Shri Sanjay N. Naik
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
51.
Smt. Shubshri R. Khorjuvekar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
52.
Kum. Priyanka P. Satardekar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
53.
Smt. Mumtaj Malgunkar
Marathi Typist
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
54.
—
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
55.
Shri Dilip N. Gaunker
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
56.
Shri Bhupesh B. Gaude
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
57.
—
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
58.
Shri Mohan N. Naik
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
59.
Smt. Ruchita R. Naik
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
60.
Shri Pradeep S. Kurpaskar
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
61.
Shri Yeshwant K. Gaude
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
62.
Shri Krishna S. Gaude
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
63.
Shri Daoo K. Kunkalikar
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
64.
Shri Rajendra C. Kerkar
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
65.
Shri Dhiresh G. Naik
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
66.
Shri Shivanand D. Madkaikar
Sorter
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
67.
Shri Dilip R. Gaunekar
Receptionist
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
68.
Shri Harishchandra Betkikar
Sr. Binder (Foreman)
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
69.
Shri Umesh Gaonkar
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
70.
—
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
71.
Shri Nilesh Gaude
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
72.
Shri Santosh B. Kudalkar
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
73.
—
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
74.
Shri Vishnukant Gaude
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
75.
Shri Binudas Parwar
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-3
76.
—
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
77.
Shri Caetano Fernandes
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
78.
Shri Rajaram L. Malik
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
79.
Shri Narayan O. Naik
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
80.
—
Binder
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
81.
Shri Manuel Monteiro
Driver
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
82.
Shri Uday L. Naik
Driver
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
83.
Shri Dina Naik
Sweeper
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
84.
Smt. Rajani D. Naik
Sweeper
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
85.
Shri Tulshidas Y. Kurpaskar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
86.
Shri Vinod D. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
87.
Shri Prakash V. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
88.
Shri Mahesh M. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
89.
Shri Durgadas Gauns
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
90.
Shri Dadi H. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
2352
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
91.
Shri Pundalik L. Gaude
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
92.
Shri Deepak N. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
93.
Shri Vassudeo R. Gauns
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
94.
Shri Charudatta Parwar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
95.
Shri Chudamani S. Gaude
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
96.
Shri Bholadas V. Gaude
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
Gaunekar
97.
Shri Gouresh J. Tari
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
98.
Shri Rameshwar G. Gaude
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
99.
Shri Suraj R. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
100.
Smt. Aparna A. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
101.
Shri Subhash S. Parab
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
102.
Shri Gregorio Bebial Peixoto
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
103.
Smt. Manasavi M. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
104.
Shri Ramdas Y. Kankonkar
Watchman
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
105.
Shri Sitaram D. Divkar
Watchman
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
106.
Shri Laxman B. Bhosale
Watchman
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
107.
Smt. Yogita V. Dessai
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
108.
Shri Yeshwant R. Velip
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
109.
Smt. Shali S. Gaunso
Farash
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
110.
Shri Sapnesh L. Chari
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
111.
Shri Dayanand C. Velip
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
112.
Smt. Seema X. Corjuvenkar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
113.
Smt. Mumtaj B. M. Sanji
Sweeper
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
114.
Shri Vishnu S. Tari
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
115.
Shri Hanumant N. Diukar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
116.
Shri Sanjay C. Palyekar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
117.
Shri Ganashyam Guna Fadte
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
118.
Shri Gangadhar P. Gadekar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
119.
Smt. Nirupa D. Chari
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
120.
Smt. Snehal S. Vengurlekar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
121.
Shri Anil B. Gaonkar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
122.
Shri Satish G. Gaude
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
123.
Shri Guru V. Velip
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
124.
Shri Deepak M. Velip
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
125.
Smt. Anandi A. Gaonkar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
126.
Shri John M. Menezes
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
127.
Shri Nandan G. Naik
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
128.
—
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2353
ANNEXURE-III
List of the posts/staff to be transferred from Directorate of Archives and Archaeology to Department
of Archaeology, Panaji-Goa.
Sr. No.
Name of the official
Designation
Gazetted/Non-Gazetted
Grade Pay
1
2
3
4
5
1.
Dy. Director (Admn.) Gazetted PB-3, Level-10
2.
Dr. Varad Sudhir Sabnis
Asstt. Supdt., Archaeologist
Gazetted PB-2, Level-7
3.
—
Exploration Officer
Gazetted PB-2, Level-6
4.
—
Information Officer
Non-Gazetted
PB-2, Level-6
5.
Kum. Dipika B. Bhomkar
Exploration Asstt.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
6.
Shri Sumesh Mahale
Conservation Asstt.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
7.
Shri Ashok R. Parwar
Horticulture Assistant
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
8.
Shri Manashrey M. Dicholkar
Photographer
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-5
9.
Shri Shripad G. Bhat
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
10.
Shri Ramakant D. Velip
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
11.
Shri Prashant B. Jadhav
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
12.
Shri Uday S. Talawanekar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
13.
Shri Shriram Y. Nagvenkar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
14.
Shri Ramesh B. Gaonkar
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
15.
Shri Atchut Bapu Polji
MTS
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-1
MINISTERIAL STAFF
16.
Shri Siddesh Kamulkar
L.D.C.
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-2
17.
Shri Ramchandra S. Naik
Driver
Non-Gazetted
PB-1, Level-7
———uuu———
Department of Civil Aviation
Directorate of Civil Aviation
–––
Order
No. 182/DOCA/AEMC/2022-446
An Airport Environmental Management
Committee for Greenfield International Airport at
Mopa is constituted with following members:-
1. Chief Secretary/Secretary,
— Chairman.
Civil Aviation
2. Secretary, Environment.
3. Collector (North Goa).
4. Superintendent of Police (North Goa).
5. Director, Directorate of Civil Aviation.
6. Principal Chief Engineer (PWD).
7. Chief Engineer, WRD.
8. Director, Health Services.
9. Member Secretary, Goa State Pollution Control
Board.
10. Member Secretary, Goa State Biodiversity Board.
11. Deputy Conservator of Forest (North Goa)
12. Deputy Chief Executive Officer, — Convenor.
GGIAL
13. Chief Operating Officer, GGIAL.
14. Head Operations, GGIAL.
15. Head EHS & Sustainability — GGIAL.
The Committee shall have the powers to co-opt
more members, if necessary. The Committee may
preferably meet at least 4 times in a year.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dr. S. Shanbhogue, Director/ex officio Joint
Secretary.
Porvorim, 13th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Co-operation
Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies
–––
Notification
No. 3/10/Urban Credit/TS-II/PZ/2018/RCS/2440
Read:
1. Notification No. 3/3/Urban Credit/TS II/
/PZ/2017/RCS/Suppl.5306 dated 10-02-2020;
2354
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2. Order No. 3/10/Urban Credit/TS-II/PZ/
/2018/RCS/1292 dated 16-07-2020;
3. Order No. 3/10/Urban Credit/TS-II/PZ/
/2018/RCS/1450 dated 27-08-2021;
4. Letter No. SPUCCSL/29/2022-2023 dated
22-09-2022 from Secretary of the Shiroda
Progressive Urban Co-op. Credit Society
Ltd., Shiroda, Goa;
5. Letter No. SPUCCSL/33/2022-23 dated
03-10-2022 from Secretary of Shiroda
Progressive Urban Co-op. Credit Society
Ltd., Shiroda, Goa.
Whereas, vide Notification at reference No. 1
above issued by the Government exercising the
powers under Section 126A of the Goa Co-operative
Societies Act, 2001 (Goa Act 36 of 2001), (hereafter
referred to as ‘Act’) the provision of sub-section (1)
of Section 91 D of the Act was modified and the
Registrar of Co-operative Societies was authorized
to appoint Officers of Co-operative Credit Societies,
V.K.S.S. Societies having credit counters and
Multipurpose Societies as Recovery Officer/Sale
Officer upon receipt of individual proposals subject
to the terms and conditions as may be incorporated
in the order.
And whereas, vide Order read at Sr. No. 2 above
issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies,
the General Manager of the Shiroda Progressive
Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Kamaxi
Harmony, Ground Floor, Bhatim, Shiroda, Goa was
delegated with the powers to recover certain sums
by attachment and sale of property vested in
Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section
91D of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001
read with Rule 124 of the Goa Co-operative Societies
Rules, 2003 subject to the following conditions:-
1. The Officer appointed and delegated with
the powers of Sales-cum-Recovery Officer shall
work
under
the
general
guidance,
superintendence and control of the Asstt.
Registrar of Co-op. Societies, Arbitration/
/Execution, North Goa District, Ponda-Goa.
2. The Board of Directors of the society shall be
fully responsible along with the Chief
Executive Officer for any acts in contravention
of the Act, Rules and Bye-laws.
3. The Board of Directors shall review the perfor-
mance of the General Manager every month
and ensure compliance.
The delegation of powers was for a period from
16-07-2021 to 31-03-2021, which was further
extended for a period of 1 year vide Order at ref.
No. 3 above.
And whereas, vide letters at ref. Nos. 4 and 5
above, the Secretary of Shiroda Progressive Urban
Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Shiroda, Goa has
requested to grant further extension of one year to
the General Manager of their society to act as Sale-
-cum-Recovery Officer for their society.
Now, therefore in exercise of the powers conferred
upon undersigned under Section 123B of the Goa
Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 read with
Notification read at ref. No. 1 above, the delegation
of powers to General Manager of the Shiroda
Progressive Urban Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., Kamaxi
Harmony, Ground Floor, Bhatim, Shiroda-Goa, are
hereby extended for a further period of one year
with retrospective effect from 01-04-2022 to
31-03-2023.
All the terms and conditions mentioned in the
order referred to at Sr. No. 2 above shall continue
to apply. The undersigned reserves the right to
withdraw this order at any stage without assigning
any reasons.
Given under the seal of this office.
Vishant S.N. Gaunekar, Registrar of Co-op.
Societies & ex officio Joint Secretary (Co-operation).
Panaji, 14th October, 2022.
———u———
Office of the Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative
Societies
–––
Corrigendum
No. ARCS/CZ/HSG/945/ADM/20/1491
Read: 1.
Memo No. ARCS/CZ/HSG/945/ADM/20/
/989 dated 19-07-2022.
2.
Notification/Certificate of Registration
No. RCSCZ2022230014 dated 19-07-2022.
The name of the society specified in the Memo,
Notification and Registration Certificate referred at
preamble shall be read as “The Meera Residency
Co-operative Housing Maintenance Society Ltd.”,
instead of “The Meera Residency Co-operative
Housingg Mentainance Society Ltd.”.
The other contents in the Memo, Notification
and Registration Certificate referred at Sr. No. 1
and 2 above will remain unchanged.
Smita Kankonkar, Asstt. Registrar (Co-op.
Societies) (Central Zone).
Panaji, 11th October, 2022.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2355
Department of Education, Art and Culture
Directorate of Higher Education
–––
Order
No. DHE/Admn/150/WA-Asst.Dir/2022/19660
Sanction of the Government is hereby accorded
for availing the services on working arrangement
basis of Miss Bhakti Chandrakant Naik, Assistant
Professor at V. M. Salgaocar College of Law as
Assistant Director (Academic) of Higher Education
as a stopgap arrangement.
Miss Bhakti Chandrakant Naik shall draw her
salary as Assistant Professor of V. M. Salgaocar
College of Law and her working arrangement shall
be a temporary measure until the post of Assistant
Director is filled on regular basis.
The Principal of V. M. Salgaocar College of Law
shall relieve Miss Bhakti Chandrakant Naik,
Assistant Professor with immediate effect.
This issues with the approval of Government.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Avelina D’sa E Pereira, Under Secretary (Higher
Education).
Porvorim, 17th October, 2022.
————
Notification
No. ADMN/APPT./CHAIRMAN/GEDC/36/2018/19544
Read: 1) Notification No. 2/23/Accts/DHE/09-10/PF-
-I/53 dated 06-04-2017.
2) Order No. ADMN/APPT./CHAIRMAN/
/GED/36/2018/5856 dated 27-02-2019.
3) Notification No. ADMN/APPT./CHAIRMAN/
/GEDC/36/2018/207 dated 22-04-2020.
4) Notification No. ADMN/APPT./CHAIRMAN/
/GEDC/36/2018/4107 dated 23-10-2020.
5) Notification No. ADMN/APPT./CHAIRMAN/
/GEDC/36/2018/2051 dated 14-07-2021.
In exercise of the power conferred under sub-
-section (1) of Section 4 of the Goa Education
Development Corporation Act, 2003 (Act No. 22 of
2003), and in supersession of Order read in
preamble, the Government of Goa is pleased to
re-constitute the Goa Education Development
Corporation with immediate effect as below:-
1. Shri Govind B. Parvatkar
—
Chairman.
2. Secretary (Higher Education) —
Director.
3. Director (Higher Education)
—
Director.
4. Shri Narsiha Bhattgaonkar
—
Director.
5. Shri Babaji G. Sawant
—
Director.
6. Managing Director, GEDC
—
Ex officio
Secretary.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Avelina D’ Sa E Pereira, Under Secretary (Higher
Education).
Porvorim, 11th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Finance
Revenue & Control Division
–––
Order
No. 6/04/2022-23/Fin(R&C)/904
The Government is pleased to accept the
technical resignation dated 06-10-2022 tendered by
Shri Naresh Kushta Gaude from the post of State
Tax Officer (Group “B” Gazetted) in the Office of
the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Althino,
Panaji-Goa and Shri Naresh Kushta Gaude is relieved
from his duties as State Tax Officer w.e.f. 19th
October, 2022 (B.N.), in order to enable him to join
the post of Junior Scale Officer of Goa Civil Service
in the Department of Personnel, Government of Goa,
Secretariat, Porvorim-Goa.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Pranab G. Bhat, Under Secretary, Finance (R&C).
Porvorim, 18th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Information and Publicity
–––
Notification
No. DI/INF/PAC/2019/-21/4/3191
In pursuance of Rule 9 (b) of the Goa Media
Representatives Accreditation Rules, the Government
of Goa is pleased to constitute the Press Accreditation
Committee consisting of the following members:
1. Shri Sadguru Patil
—
Member.
2. Shri Pandurang Gaonkar
—
Member.
3. Shri Avit Bagle
—
Member.
4. Shri Vasudev Pagi
—
Member.
5. Shri Kailas Naik
—
Member.
6. Shri Marcus Mergulhao
—
Member.
7. Ms. Pooja Naik
—
Member.
8. Shri Tulsidas Raul
—
Member.
2356
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
9. Shri Loukik Shilkar
—
Member.
10. Shri William Rodrigues
—
Member.
11. Shri Mahesh Gaonkar
—
Member.
12. Director, Information &
—
Member
Publicity
Secretary.
The members of the Committee shall elect a
Chairman from among themselves by simple
majority.
The term of Committee shall be for a period of
two years, commencing from the date of 1st
meeting.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dipak Bandekar, Director (Information & Publicity).
Panaji, 13th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Information Technology
–––
Addendum
No. 1(90)/DOIT/ITG-DIR/2001/1084
Read: Notification No. 1(90)/DOIT/ITG-DIR/2001/95
dated 22-04-2022.
The following name may be added after Sr. No. 4
in the second para of the said Notification.
“Sr. No. 5) Director (IT), DOIT,
—
Director.”
Altinho, Panaji
6) Dr. Dinesh Anand
—
Member.
Amonkar, Bicholim-Goa
7) Shri Rajan Anand
Kadkade, Bicholim-Goa —
Member.
8) Shri Jerry Mathew, —
Member.
Porvorim-Goa
9) Shri Manguirish Salelkar, —
Member.”
Margao-Goa
This is issued with the approval of competent
authority, vide U.O. No. 1140/F dated 30-09-2022.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Praveen R. Volvotkar, Director (IT)/ex officio Jt.
Secretary.
Panaji, 13th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Industries
–––
Order
No. 14/9/2019-IND/Part/246
The Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium
Enterprises (MSME) is implementing Micro and
Small Enterprises Cluster Development Programme
(MSE-CDP) since 2003. The objective of this scheme
is to enhance the productivity and competitiveness
of Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs) by extending
financial assistance for establishment of Common
Facility Centers (CFCs) and creation and
up-gradation of Industrial Estates including Flatted
Factory Complexes.
In the light of new fund release mechanism as
mandated by Department of Expenditure, Ministry
of Finance, Government of India regarding revised
procedure for flow of fund under Central Sector
Schemes, the Government of Goa is pleased to
nominate Goa Investment Promotion & Facilitation
Board (Goa-IPB) as “Central Nodal Agency” (CNA)
for implementing each Central Sector Scheme.
The CNA will have to open a Central Nodal
Account for each Central Sector Scheme in a
scheduled commercial bank authorized to conduct
Government business by the Ministry/Department
concerned.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Industries).
Porvorim, 13th October, 2022.
————
Order
No. 3/7/2017-IND/248
The Government of Goa is pleased to accept the
Technical Resignation of Shri Himanshu Rajesh
Patnekar, Functional Manager (Group ‘B’ Gazetted,
in the pay scale of PB 2 Rs. 9,300-34,800 with Grade
Pay of Rs. 4,600/-, Level 7 of the Pay Matrix in 7th
Pay Commission) in Directorate of Industries, Trade
& Commerce, Panaji in order to enable him to join
as Junior Scale Officer of Goa Civil Service (Group
‘A’ Gazetted) in the Department of Personnel,
Government of Goa, Secretariat, Porvorim-Goa.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Industries).
Porvorim, 14th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Labour
––
Order
No. 28/24/2022-LAB/548
Whereas, the Government of Goa is of the opinion
that an industrial dispute exists between the
management of M/s. Netzsch Technologies India
Private Limited, L-10, Verna Industrial Estate, Verna,
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2357
Goa and it’s workmen, represented by the Bhartiya
Kamgar Sena, in respect of the matter specified in
the Schedule hereto (hereinafter referred to as the
“said dispute”);
And whereas, the Government of Goa considers it
expedient to refer the said dispute for adjudication.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred
by Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947),
(hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), the
Government of Goa hereby refers the said dispute
for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal of Goa at
Panaji-Goa, constituted under Section 7A of the said
Act.
S C H E D U L E
(1) Whether the action of the management of M/s.
Netzsch Technologies India Private Limited,
L-10, Verna Industrial Estate, Verna, Goa in refusing
to concede the following charter of demands raised
by the Bhartiya Kamgar Sena, vide letter dated
11-01-2022, is legal and justified?
CHARTER OF DEMANDS
Demand No. 1:-
APPLICABILITY :- The revision as per the Charter
of Demands shall be applicable to all permanent
workmen who are members of the said union and it
shall also be applicable to those probationers who
would be subsequently absorbed as permanent
employees who become members of the Union
hereafter.
Demand No. 2:-
FLAT RISE/FITMENT :- Each worker be given a
flat rise of Rs. 7000/- in the basic salary as on 1st June,
2021. After adding the above flat rise to the basic
salary as on 31-03-2021 the revised basic salary so
arrived at will be then fitted in the higher Pay Scale
in the Grade at appropriate stage and/or next stage
in the Pay Scale.
Demand No. 3:-
GRADES AND SCALE OF PAY:-
Technicians Operators- 9000-700-12500-800-
16500-900-21000-1000-26000-1100-31500.
Demand No. 4:-
(a) DEARNESS ALLOWANCES:- With effect from
01st June, 2021 each workman should be paid Fixed
Dearness Allowance at 50% of the revised basic.
(b)VARIABLE DEARNESS ALLOWANCE:- With
effect from 01st June, 2021 each workman should be
paid Variable Dearness Allowance at Rs. 25/- per point
rise over and above base 100 points (AAICPI-
-2016=100). The Variable Dearness Allowance should
be revised once every quarter. For computing VDA
the AICPI for the period January 2021 to March 2021
shall be taken as base for payment of VDA with effect
from 01-06-2021 and April 2021 to June 2021, July
2021 to September 2021 and October 2021 to
December 2021 shall be taken as base for further
quarters and the same cycle shall continue.
Demand No. 5:- ALLOWANCE:-
HOUSE RENT ALLOWANCE (HRA):- All the
workmen should be paid additional House Rent
Allowance of Rs. 2,000/- per month over and above
the existing HRA. The HRA be revised every year at
10% of the basic.
Demand No. 6:-
LEAVE TRAVEL ALLOWANCE:- Each workmen
should be entitled to Leave Travel Allowance @ one
gross salary once in a year.
Demand No. 7:-
EDUCATION ALLOWANCE:- All the workmen
should be paid Education Allowance @ Rs. 1,000/-
per month.
Demand No. 8:-
CONVEYANCE ALLOWANCE:- Each workman
should be paid an amount of Rs. 500/- per month
over and above the existing Conveyance Allowance.
Demand No. 9:-
MEDICAL ALLOWANCE :- Each workman should
be paid an amount of Rs. 5,000/- p.m. as Medical
Assistance Allowance over and above the existing
medical allowance.
Demand No. 10:-
SHIFT ALLOWANCE:- Each workman should be
paid Rs. 50/- for 2nd Shift and Rs. 100/- for 3rd Shift
respectively.
Demand No. 11:-
MONSOON ALLOWANCE:- An amount of Rs. 1000/-
p.a. should be given as Monsoon Allowance to each
workman.
Demand No. 12:- LEAVE FACILITIES:-
(A) PRIVILEGE LEAVE :- All the workmen should
be given following privilege leave every year.
(a) For first 240 days :
30 days P/L.
(b) After 240 days :
for every 5 working days,
one day P/L with a right to
accumulate for three years
and balance P/L should be
allowed to be encashed. In
the event any leave is
refused by the company the
maximum accumulation of
2358
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
leave of 3 years shall be
increased by the leave refusal.
(B) CASUAL LEAVE:- All the workmen should be
given 15 days Casual Leave in a year with full pay.
Unavailed Casual Leave should be allowed to be
encashed.
(C) SICK LEAVE:- All the workmen should be given
15 days Sick Leave in a year with full pay.
(D) Special leave should be granted for chronic
illness which is sanctioned by doctors till the fitness
of patient.
(E) The company has been refusing leave to the
members of the Union without giving any reason even
though the leave is requested for well in advance to
harass the members. The company should stop this
harassment and grant leave as and when applied for.
Demand No. 13:-
LOAN:- Each unionized worker should be given
loan as under:-
(a) Personal Loan :
Rs. 3 Lakh at 50% subsidy p.a.
(b) Housing Loan :
All the workmen should be
provided a Housing Loan as
per requirement by the
employee at 50% subsidyp.a.
Demand No. 14:-
INCENTIVES:- All the workmen should be paid
1% of the profit share p.a..
Demand No. 15:-
PUNCHING CARD:- Provisions of punching card
should be made near the security gate.
Demand No. 16:-
SHIFT TIMES:- In case of three shift working
1st Shift time
—
08.00 to 16.00 hours.
2nd Shift time
—
16.00 to 12.00 hours.
3rd Shift time
—
00.00 to 08.00 hours.
Two times tea break in each shift to be given to
each workman. The overlapping of shifts should be
discontinued.
Demand No. 17:-
TRANSPORT:- Transport should be provided in all
the shifts free of cost. The buses should transport the
workers from factory to the schedule drop point and
shall start within 10 minutes of the schedule shifts
timings.
Existing facility of providing transportation in all
shifts should be extended further as follows:-
(i) Verna Plant : Cortalim-Aggasium-Bambolim-
Panaji-Porvorim-Mapusa.
Verna Plant-Margao KTC-Nuvem-Power House.
(ii) Verna Plant-Birla Cross-New Wada Vasco-KTC
Vasco-Sada Vasco.
(iii) General Shift Transport-Verna Plant-Ponda-
-Margao-Vasco-Panjim.
Demand No. 18:-
BONUS & EX-GRATIA:- All the workmen should
be given 20% bonus on basic, DA, VDA, and HRA and
20% ex-gratia on their total annual emoluments every
year. The bonus payable is irrespective of the ceiling
under Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.
Demand No. 19:-
SERVICE REWARD:- Company should give service
reward to the workmen who have completed 5 years
and 10 years. They should be given Rs. 5,000/- and Rs.
10,000/- respectively.
Demand No. 20:-
MEDICAL SCHEME:-
(a) All the workmen who are out of ESI Scheme
should be given unlimited amount for
treatment for self, spouse and two dependent
children upto the age of 25 years.
(b) Normal day-to-day Medical bills should be
claimed after submission of bills.
(c) Company should tie up to two standard
hospitals near company to get immediate
treatment to the workmen in emergency.
(d) Company should make available of ambulance
for 24 hours in the company’s premises.
Demand No. 21:-
(1) Company should give time for Union to take
meetings in the premises every 3 months.
(2) Company should continue short leave of 2 hours
or late reporting of 10 minutes to all the Union
members in case of any emergency.
(3) Seniority increment in basic salary to the
seniors, who have completed 5 years, 10 years and
above should be given 2 increments, 3 increments
respectively.
(4) In case of job rotation in the same grade for any
union workers, intimation letter should be given to
the workers stating type of work, period with duly
signed by Union leader, President and the rotated
employee. The operators should not be rotated in
Jobs which were not done by the operators in the
past.
(5) Marriage gift of Rs. 5000/- as token of love
should be given to each workman who is getting
married should be continued.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2359
(6) Birthday/Marriage Anniversary gift.
(7) The management should accept the
correspondence from the Union/workmen when
offered.
Demand No. 22:-
INSURANCE POLICY :- All the workmen and their
family members should be covered under the group
personal accident insurance policy. The accident
coverage of each workman and his family should be
revised to Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only). The
coverage should be on a 24 hours basis. The term &
conditions prevailing as per the policy shall be
binding.
Demand No. 23:-
LUMP SUM PAYMENT :- All the workman should
be given one time lump sum amount of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten thousand only) as settlement signing
incentive.
Demand No. 24:-
FESTIVAL ADVANCE:- The permanent workmen
should be paid festival advance of Rs. 24,000/- per
year. The advance will be paid once a year, either for
Ganesh Chaturthi, Id or Christmas as per request
made by the workmen in writing. The advances
should be deducted in 12 equal monthly installments
from the salary of the workmen.
Demand No. 25:-
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) be granted
to each of the workmen w.e.f. 01-06-2021 by way of
Interim Relief pending finalization of the Charter of
Demands.
Demand No. 26:-
In the night shift the management should give 15
minutes rest after every hour of working with a
reliever operator during the said period.
Demand No. 27:-
WASHING ALLOWANCE:- The Union demands
that the company should give washing allowance of
Rs. 500/- p.m. for washing the company provided
uniforms. In the alternative the company should
provide Laundry facility to wash the company
uniforms.
Demand No. 28:-
HOUSE KEEPING FACILITY:-
(a) The Company presently doing the cleaning of
the floors by engaging casual labour. The
company should provide additional casual
labour to clear the floor area, other areas and
machines etc.
(b) Casual workers should be provided wherever
required in production areas.
Demand No. 29:-
SNACKS :- At present only the first shift workers
are provided free breakfast. The company should give
the same facility to the worker who report in 2nd
shift and 3rd shift.
Demand No. 30:-
ATTENDANCE ALLOWANCE:- All the workmen
should be given Attendance Allowance as shown
below:-
(a) For 26 days present
Rs. 900/-.
(b) For 24 days present
Rs. 700/-.
(c) For 22 days present
Rs. 500/-.
Demand No. 31:-
RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT:- All the above demands
should be given with retrospective effect from
01-06-2021 to 31-05-2024.
(2) If answer to issue No. (1) is negative then, what
relief the workmen are entitled?.
By order and in the name of the Governor
of Goa.
Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 4th October, 2022.
————
Order
No. 28/28/2022-LAB/572
Whereas, the Government of Goa is of the opinion
that an industrial dispute exists between the
management of M/s. St. Anne’s School, St. Anne’s
Education Trust, Agalli, Fatorda, Margao, Goa and
it’s workman, Shri Menino Gomes, Driver, in respect
of the matter specified in the Schedule hereto;
And whereas, the Government of Goa considers
it expedient to refer the said dispute for
adjudication.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers
conferred by Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section
10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act
14 of 1947), the Government of Goa hereby refers
the said dispute for adjudication to the Labour
Court-II of Goa at Panaji-Goa, constituted under
Section 7(1) of the said Act.
SCHEDULE
(1) Whether the action of the management of
M/s. St. Anne’s School, St. Anne’s Education
Trust, Agalli, Fatorda, Margao, Goa, in
2360
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
dismissing Shri Menino Gomes, Driver, with
effect from 07-09-2020, is legal and justified?
(2) If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 14th October, 2022.
————
Notification
No. 28/02/2022-LAB/Part-III/440
The following Award passed by the Industrial
Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on
29-07-2022 in Ref. No. IT/12/2017 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.
Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 19th August, 2022.
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND
LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(Before Ms. Bela N. Naik, Honble Presiding
Officer)
Ref. No. IT/12/2017
Workmen,
Rep. by General Secretary,
Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh,
G-5, Macedo Appts.,
Tisk, Ponda-Goa
… Workmen/Party I.
V/s
M/s. Indi Pharma Pvt. Ltd.,
Plot No- 2-9,
Bethora Industrial Estate,
Bethora, Ponda-Goa
… Employer/Party II.
Workperson/Party-I represented by Ld. Represen-
tative Shri P. Gaonkar.
Employer/Party-II represented by Adv. Shri M. S.
Bandodkar along with Adv. Shri P. Bandodkar.
A W A R D
(Delivered on this the 29th day of the month of
July of the Year 2022)
By Order dated 17-05-2017, bearing No. 28/
/49/2016-LAB/351, 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
Indi Pharma Private Limited, Plot No. 2-9, Bethora
Industrial Estate, Bethora, Goa in retrenching
the following seven workmen with effect from
03-07-2008, is legal and justified?
Serial No.
Name
Designation
1.
Shri Vasudev B. Gaude
Operator.
2.
Shri Ramnath Kodarkar
Operator.
3.
Shri Prakash Naik
Operator.
4.
Shri Ramdas K. Gaude
Operator.
5.
Shri Prashant Naik
Operator.
6.
Shri Ulhas Kanekar
Operator.
7.
Shri Anand Kotharkar
Operator.
(2) If the answer to issue No. (1) above is in the
negative, then, what relief the workmen are
entitled to?”
2. Upon receipt of the reference, it was registered
as IT/12/2017 and registered A/D notices were issued
to both the parties. Pursuant to service of notices,
Party I filed a Claim Statement at Exhibit 4. Thereafter,
the Party II filed its Written Statement which is at
Exhibit 6.
3. The brief facts giving rise to the present
reference is that the Party I states that M/s Indi
Pharma Private Limited is a pharma industry
manufacturing various pharma products employing
more than 200 workmen including the temporary
workmen at Bethora Industrial estate, Ponda-Goa and
the seven workmen mentioned in the Order of
Reference were working as Operators in the Factory
since 1998 and they were in continuous employment.
That in the month of May, 2008 the Party II/Employer
sought for permission to retrench these seven
workmen under the provisions of Chapter VB of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the appropriate
Authority have rejected the permission for
retrenchment as the Order was given by the
Appropriate Authority after 60 days and the
Management challenged the said Order before the
Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Goa and the Hon’ble
High Court quashed the said Government Order on
technical grounds. After quashing the said Order,
the workmen through their Union raised an industrial
dispute vide letter dated 13-10-2014 and on receipt
of the said letter the Asst. Labour Commissioner
(ALC), Ponda-Goa called both the Parties for joint
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2361
discussions which ended in failure due to the
adamant attitude of the Management.
4. The Party I further states that on receipt of the
Failure Report, the Appropriate Government referred
the said dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication. The
Party I states that the Party II was involved in the
habit of implementing various unfair labour
practices such as non-payment of minimum wages,
engaging the temporary workers for years together
by giving artificial breaks, non-implementation of
provisions of various labour laws. It is further stated
that the Party II were having huge orders and were
engaging more than 100 temporary workers. Party I
further submits that the workmen in the reference
were senior most workmen and only to terminate
their services, the Management has issued the illegal
retrenchment to these permanent workmen. After
the retrenchment of these permanent workmen the
Party II engaged new workmen on their place of work
in order to abolish the permanent post and to engage
the temporary or contract workers on their
workplace. Since the Management has engaged new
workmen, their Union requested the Office of the
Labour Commissioner vide their letter dated
29-06-2010 to direct the Employer to re-employ them
in accordance with the provisions of Section 25-H of
the Industrial Disputes Act and upon receipt of the
said representation, the Office of the Labour
Commissioner called both the Parties on various
occasions and finally on 28-06-2012, the Management
offered them the work of unskilled nature although
all these seven workmen were working as Operators.
The four workmen namely, Shri Ramnath Kodarkar,
Shri Ramdas Gaude, Shri Prakash Naik and Shri
Anand Kotharkar in duress accepted the offer of the
Management of unskilled work and rejoined the duty
w.e.f. 06-06-2012. That after re-joining the Company,
the Employer has taken the work of semi-skilled and
skilled nature, however they were paid the wages as
per the minimum wages of unskilled category. The
Party II employed new workmen to carry out the work
of these workmen and there were more than 119
workers whose contributions were paid for the period
from 01-10-2008 to 31-03-2009.
5. The Party I states that the action of the
Management in retrenching these workmen and
engaging junior workers, temporary workers or
contract workers in their place is totally bad in law
and illegal and before the retrenchment, the
Management has not followed the provisions of
Section 25-N and 25-G of the Industrial Disputes
Act. The party I also states that the workmen namely,
Shri Vasudev Gaude, Shri Prakash Naik and Shri Ulhas
Kanekar who were working as Operators did not
accept the offer of re-employment of the Management
in unskilled category as they were the most senior
workmen. The workmen namely, Shri Ramdas Gaude
who was re-employed expired while he was on duty
on 27-02-2007 and as such his legal heirs are entitled
for the full back wages from the date of retrenchment
till the date of re-employment and difference of wages
from 06-02-2012 along with other dues. Hence, the
Party I pray that the action of the Management in
retrenching them from services w.e.f. 03-07-2008 be
declared as illegal and unjustified and they are
entitled for re-instatement with full back wages and
continuity in service as prayed by them in the Claim
Statement.
6. In the Written Statement the Party II/Employer
has raised objections that the entire reference is bad
in law and not maintainable and needs to be rejected
and they have denied all the allegations made
against them in the Claim Statement by the Party I.
7. It is the case of the Party II that it had two
departments
and
one
department
was
manufacturing ointment and another department
was manufacturing tablets and capsules. The Tablets
and Capsules Department was closed down from
22-06-2007 in compliance with an Order dated
20-06-2007 of the Directorate of Foods and Drugs
Administration (FDA), Goa and for about one year
the workmen working in the Tablets and Capsules
Department were required to be kept idle and
subsequently these workers were retrenched by
giving notice u/s 25-N and thereafter they were
retrenched in accordance with law by paying them
all the legal dues to be paid as required under Section
25-F and 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act.
8. The Party II gave a notice dated 18-07-2007 to
the Government about retrenchment under Chapter
V-B along with an application dated 07-09-2007
seeking permission for retrenchment of 13 workmen
working in the said Department and the Government
of Goa after hearing gave the permission to the Party
II in terms of the deeming provisions u/s 25-N (4) of
the Industrial Disputes Act, i.e. on the expiration of
60 days after Party II made the application for
permission to retrench and hence, the Party II
retrenched the workmen as per the law by giving
them the compensation as required u/s 25-F and
25-N of the said Act. The Party II states that before
the actual and physical retrenchment they even
made a letter dated 16-01-2008 bringing to the notice
of Government of Goa that since 60 days have expired,
the permission for retrenchment is deemed to be
granted under the Industrial Disputes Act under
expiry of 60 days from the date of filing of the said
application.
9. The Party II further states that the Government
of Goa did not reply to their letter dated 16-01-2008
2362
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
thereby confirming indirectly that it was fully
justified for the Party II to retrench the workmen. The
Party II infact has permanently closed the said
Department from 22-06-2007 more than one year
before the date of the retrenchment and infact has
paid idle wages for more than one year to the
workmen before they were retrenched. The
Government of Goa have given them deemed
permission and as such the retrenchment is already
deemed to have been granted on the expiry of 60
days from the date the application for permission to
retrench was made by the Company. It is further
stated that though they have retrenched 13
workmen, only seven workmen have raised dispute
and six workmen had accepted the position that the
retrenchment was legal and justified and as such
the stand of the said seven workmen is not justified
and illegal. The Hon’ble High Court has confirmed
the Order of Retrenchment which is by virtue of
deeming provision and on this ground also the
present reference is not maintainable. The workmen
in the present dispute have accepted temporary job
in unskilled category knowing fully well that the
Tablet and Capsules Department has been
permanently closed and no job is available to them
in the Ointment Department.
10. It is also stated that they had offered re-
employed to the retrenched workers on temporary
basis as per the availability of work and the workmen
namely Shri Vasudev Gaude, Shri Prakash Naik and
Shri Ulhas Kanekar have not accepted the offer of
re-employment as they are gainfully employed
elsewhere. Hence, the Party II states that their action
in retrenching these workmen is not illegal and
the legal heirs of the deceased workman Shri Ramdas
Gaude is entitled to the amount, if any, i.e. lawfully
due to Late Ramdas Gaude. The Party II hence states
that the workmen are not entitled to any relief as
prayed and pray that the present reference be
rejected accordingly.
11. In the Rejoinder at Exhibit 7 the Party I denied
the case put forth by Party II in the Written Statement.
12. Based on the above mentioned pleadings my
Learned Predecessor has framed the Issues at Exhibit
10 and the same are as follows:
I S S U E S
1. Whether the Party I proves that the action of
the Party II in retrenching the workmen from
the service with effect from 03-07-2008 is illegal
and unjustified?
2. Whether the Party I proves that they are entitled
for reinstatement with full back wages and
continuity in service with consequential
benefits?
3. Whether the Party II proves that the reference
is not maintainable as stated in para A, B, C, D
& E of the Written Statement?
4. What Relief? What Award?
13. During the course of evidence the Party I
examined its first witness Shri Ramnath Kodarkar and
through this witness brought on record copy of
Appointment Letter of Mr. Vasudev Gaude dated
29-12-1998 at Exhibit 12, copy of letter dated
29-12-1998 reference to absorption of services at
Exhibit 13, copy of Appointment Letter of Mr. Ulhas
Kanekar dated 18-03-2000 at Exhibit 14, copy of
Appointment Letter of Mr. Prakash Naik dated
31-12-2002 at Exhibit 15, copy of Appointment Letter-
Training of Mr. Prashant A. Naik dated 09-02-2004 at
Exhibit 16, copy of Appointment Letter of Mr. Anand
Kotharkar dated 22-08-2005 at Exhibit 17, copy of
Appointment Letter of Mr. Prashant A. Naik dated
09-02-2005 at Exhibit 18, copy of Employees Family
Pension Scheme 191 Para 15(4) contribution period
from 01-02-2008 to 28-02-2008 at Exhibit 19, copy of
Employees Family Pension Scheme 191 Para 15(4),
Contribution period from 01-03-2008 to 28-02-2009 at
Exhibit 20, copy of letter dated 09-06-2010 reference
to request for information under Right to Information
Act along with forwarding letter to RTI at Exhibit 21
Colly, copy of letter dated 09-06-2010, certified copies
of return of contribution at Exhibit 22, copy of Return
of PF Contribution period from 01-10-2008 to
31-03-2009 and from 01-04-2009 to 31-10-2009 and
copy of ESI Returns at Exhibit 23 Colly, Copy of Notice
dated 11-04-2012 to the Management by the Labour
Commissioner at Exhibit 24, copy of minutes of
meeting held before the Commissioner, Labour and
Employment, Panaji on 28-06-2012 at Exhibit 25, copy
of letter dated 13-10-2014 to the Assistant Labour
Commissioner by Party I at Exhibit 26, copy of notice
dated 20-10-2014 to both the Parties at Exhibit 27,
copy of letter dated 04-11-2014 to the Assistant
Labour Commissioner by the Management at Exhibit
28, copy of reply dated 17-11-2014 to the letter dated
04-11-2014 submitted by the Management at Exhibit
29, copy of letter dated 23-05-2016 to the Labour
Commissioner by Party I at Exhibit 30, copy of notice
dated 10-06-2016 by the Assistant Labour
Commissioner to the Management at Exhibit 31, copy
of letter dated 20-06-2016 with regards to alleged
illegal retrenchment at Exhibit 32, copy of reply
dated 21-06-2016 to the letter dated 20-06-2016 by
the Management at Exhibit 33, copy of letter dated
04-07-2016 regards to alleged illegal retrenchment
at Exhibit 34, copy of notice dated 11-07-2016 to the
Management by Assistant Labour Commissioner at
Exhibit 35, copy of notice dated 08-08-2016 to the
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2363
Management by Assistant Labour Commissioner at
Exhibit 36, copy of Minutes of conciliation
proceedings held on 08-08-2016 at Exhibit 37, copy
of report of failure of conciliation proceedings dated
31-08-2016 at Exhibit 38 and copy of letter of
appointment dated 01-04-1995 of Ramnath Kodarkar
at Exhibit 39. During cross-examination of this
witness documents brought on record were a copy
of letter dated 20-06-2007 by the Director, FDA to the
Party II at Exhibit 40, copy of the Notice dated
18-07-2007 issued to the workmen and also displayed
on the Notice Board of the Company and the copy
issued to the Health Minister, Labour Commissioner,
Field Inspector of Factories & Boilers, Assistant
Labour Commissioner, Ponda at Exhibit 41, a copy of
the application dated 07-09-2007 u/s 25-N of the
Industrial Disputes Act addressed to the Under
Secretary, Labour the Party II seeking permission to
retrench 13 workmen at Exhibit 42 Colly, a copy of
Written Objection dated 04-10-2007 along with the
annexures at Exhibit 43 Colly, Reply dated 17-10-2007
to the objection at Exhibit 44, copy of letter dated
16-01-2008 to the Under Secretary (Labour) stating
that the permission applied shall be deemed to have
been granted as more than 60 days have elapsed at
Exhibit 45, copy of letter dated 02-06-2008 by the
Commissioner, Labour and Employment to the
Company that the hearing has been fixed before the
Hon’ble Minister for Labour in his chamber at Exhibit
46, copy of letter dated 30-05-2008 by the Party II to
the Commissioner, Labour and Employment at
Exhibit 47, copy of Order dated 02-06-2008 passed by
the Appropriate Authority stating that the
Application filed by the Party II on 07-09-2007
retrenching 13 workmen has been dismissed along
with the annexures at Exhibit 48 Colly, copy of letter
dated 05-08-2008 to the Under Secretary (Labour)
raising objection to the Order dated 02-06-2008 of
Minister of Labour with a copy to the Minister for
Labour and the Union at Exhibit 49, copy of the Writ
Petition No. 557/2008 at Exhibit 50, copy of dispute
raised before Assistant Labour Commissioner and the
Company reply vide letter dated 20-07-2016 at Exhibit
51 and a copy of the complaint filed by the Party II to
the Secretary, Labour objecting for calling the
meeting vide letter dated 08-11-2016 at Exhibit 52.
14. The Party I examined its 2nd witness Shri
Prashant Naik and during cross-examination brought
on record a copy of letter dated 30-11-2011 from Party
II at Exhibit 55.
15. The Party II examined its first witness Shri Ajit
Shinkre and through this witness brought on record
copy of Company’s letter dated 27-06-2007 to the
Director, Food & Drugs Administration at Exhibit 69,
copy of Opinion of M/s Arnita Consultants, Architects
and Engineers at Exhibit 70 Colly, copy of order dated
22-06-2010 of the Authority under the Payment of
Wages Act, 1936 at Exhibit 71, copy of letters to the
seven workmen offering re-employment at Exhibit
72 Colly and copy of Postal acknowledgements from
the workers at Exhibit 73 Colly. During cross-
examination of this witness documents brought on
record were a copy of list of permanent workmen
working in the Production Department at Exhibit 74,
copy of the list of batch manufacturing record for
one week i.e. from 20-11-2019 to 26-11-2019 at Exhibit
75 Colly, copy of ESI Returns from July, 2019 to
December, 2019 at Exhibit 76 Colly, copy of PF Returns
from July, 2019 to December, 2019 at Exhibit 77 Colly
and a copy of Regularization Letter of Vasudev Gaude
dated 19-01-1999 at Exhibit 78.
16. The Party II examined its 2nd witness Shri
Eurico Noronha and through this witness brought
on record a copy of Retrenchment letter dated
26-06-2008 of Vasudev Gaude at Exhibit 83, copy of
Retrenchment letter dated 26-06-2008 of Ramnath
Kodarkar at Exhibit 84, copy of Retrenchment letter
dated 26-06-2008 of Prakash Naik at Exhibit 85, copy
of Retrenchment letter dated 26-06-2008 of Ramdas
Gaude at Exhibit 86, copy of Retrenchment letter
dated 26-06-2008 of Prashant Naik at Exhibit 87, copy
of Retrenchment letter dated 26-06-2008 of Ulhas
Kanekar at Exhibit 88, copy of Retrenchment letter
dated 26-06-2008 of Anand Kotharkar at Exhibit 89,
copy of post acknowledgement No. 5179 of Vasudev
Gaude at Exhibit 90, copy of post acknowledgement
No. 5174 of Ramnath Kodarkar at Exhibit 91, copy of
post acknowledgement No. 5172 of Prakash Naik at
Exhibit 92, copy of post acknowledgement No. 5178
of Ramdas Gaude at Exhibit 93, copy of post
acknowledgement No. 5170 of Prashant Naik at
Exhibit 94, copy of post acknowledgement No. 5168
of Ulhas Kanekar at Exhibit 95, copy of post
acknowledgement No. 5179 of Anand Kotharkar at
Exhibit 96, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Vasudev Gaude with enclosures at
Exhibit 97 Colly, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Ramnath Kodarkar with enclosures at
Exhibit 98 Colly, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Prakash Naik with enclosures at Exhibit
99 Colly, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Ramdas Gaude with enclosures at
Exhibit 100 Colly, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Prashant Naik with enclosures at
Exhibit 101 Colly, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Ulhas Kanekar with enclosures at
Exhibit 102 Colly, copy of final settlement letter dated
16-08-2008 of Anand Kotharkar with enclosures at
Exhibit 103 Colly and Copy of Certificate of Posting
dated 27-06-2008 at Exhibit 104.
2364
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
17. Heard arguments. Learned Advocate Shri S. P.
Gaonkar argued on behalf of Party I and Learned
Advocate Shri M. S. Bandodkar argued on behalf of
the Party II. Both the Parties have placed on record
written submissions.
18. I have gone through the records of the case
and have duly considered the arguments advanced
and also the arguments placed on record and after
going through the same, I have given my reasons
and findings on the issues which are framed and the
same are as follows:
Issue No. 1 & 2
…
Negative.
Issue No. 3
…
Affirmative.
Issue No. 4
…
As per the Final Order.
REASONS
Issue No. 1 and 2:
19. Issue No.1 and 2 are discussed together for the
sake of convenience and also as they are
interconnected. The Party I have examined in all six
witnesses namely Shri Ramnath Kodarkar, Shri
Prashant Naik, Shri Prakash Naik, Shri Ulhas Kanekar
and Shri Anand Kotharkar and Shri Vasudev Gaude
after which the Party I closed their case. The Party II
examined Shri Eurico Noronha and Shri Ajit Shinkre
after which they closed their case. Both the Parties
have placed on record various documents which are
at various exhibits and I have perused them in
deciding the present case.
20. The admitted fact of the present case is that
the Party I workmen were employed by the Party II
which was initially known as Helvetica Laboratories
which is subsequently known as M/s Indi Pharma
and the seven workmen whose names are mentioned
in the Order of Reference were working as ‘Operator’
in their Factory and were in continuous employment.
All these seven workmen were retrenched from the
services under the provisions of Chapter V-B of the
Industrial Disputes Act as in the month of May, 2008
the Party II sought for permission to retrench them
under the above mentioned provision. The admitted
fact is also that the Directorate of Food and Drugs
Administration had carried out an inspection of the
premises of Party II on 13-06-2007, and by a letter
dated 20-06-2007 ordered the Employer to stop
forthwith the manufacturing activity of tablets and
capsules as according to them there were certain
deficiencies in compliance with GMP Schedule-M
requirement. It is also true that the Party II had set
up its manufacturing of pharmaceutical products at
Bethora, Ponda–Goa somewhere in the year 1999 and
one building was manufacturing tablets and
capsules and ointments were manufactured in a
separate building at Bethora Plant. The
manufacturing of tablets was ordered to be stopped
vide letter dated 20-06-2007 and as such the Employer
stopped the manufacturing of tablets and capsules
from 22-06-2007. The Party I had stated that the
Employer had no intention to restart the
manufacturing of tablets and capsules and as such
the Employer permanently closed the Tablet and
Capsule Division. This position is admitted by the
workmen and the witnesses of the Party I.
21. The records and the evidence shows that the
Party II had given the workmen who were employed
in the Tablets and Capsule Department in notice in
writing dated 18-07-2007 under Section 25-N of the
Industrial Disputes Act expressing their intention
to retrench them due to the shutting down of the
tablets and capsule production as per the directions
of the FDA Director. The Party II also made an
application dated 07-09-2007 to the Government of
Goa u/s 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act for
permission under the Industrial Disputes Act to
retrench the workmen. All these documents are at
Exh. 29 to Exh. 36. It is seen that the Employer
furnished the list of workmen proposed to be
retrenched in the particular category on the last – in
–first out principle in terms of Section 25-G of the
Industrial Disputes Act and the seven workmen on
whose behalf the present reference has been raised
is by Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh. It is seen that the
Union representing the said aggrieved workmen filed
its objection for their retrenchment but the Union
did not raise any objection to the list of workmen
proposed to be retrenched and did not file any
alternative list of workmen who in their opinion
ought to have been retrenched in place of the
workmen who have raised the dispute. This position
is admitted by all the witnesses examined by the
Party I which will be discussed thereafter.
22. It is also an admitted position that the
Government of Goa failed to communicate any Order
within a period of 60 days from the date of application
for retrenchment was made by the Employer, hence,
u/s 25-N (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the
permission for retrenchment for which the Employer
had applied was deemed to have been granted by
the Government of Goa upon the expiration of said
60 days by way of deeming provision. (Copy Para 15,
17, 18 of Exh.105).
23. Now coming to the evidence of all the witnesses
examined by the Party I, it is seen that the cross-
examination of all these witnesses is almost the same.
The first witness Shri Ramnath Kodarkar who was in
the services of the Party II from 1998 and he was
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2365
retrenched by the Party II on account of closure of
Tablet Department w.e.f. 22-06-2007. He has placed
on record the documents from Exh.12 to 39. In his
cross-examination he has admitted that he has no
document to show that was a member of the Goa
Trade and Commercial Workers’ Union nor he has
produced any documents to show that he was the
member of the Goa Trade and Commercial Workers’
Union though he contends that he was paying
Membership Fee. He is aware of the letter dated
20-06-2007 made by the Director of FDA directing
the Party II to stop manufacturing tablets and
capsules at Bethora. The said letter is at Exh. 40 which
is admitted by him. He has also admitted that on
18-07-2007 the Company had issued notice to all the
workmen and has also displayed the said notice on
the Notice Board of the Company and the copy issued
to Health Minister, Labor Commissioner, Asstt.
Labour Commissioner, Field Inspector of Factories
which document is at Exh. 41. He is also aware of the
application dated 07-09-2007 u/s 25-N of the Industrial
Disputes Act addressed to the Under Secretary,
Labour by which the Company sought permission to
retrench 13 workmen which document along with
the annexures is at Exh. 42 Colly (produced in cross).
He is also aware about the objection given by the
Union in writing dated 04-10-2007 which is at Exh.
43 Colly (produced in cross) and he is also aware that
the Company had responded to their objection vide
letter dated 17-10-2007 which is at Exh. 44 (produced
in cross). He is also aware of the letter made by the
Company to the Under Secretary (Labour) dated
16-01-2008 stating that the permission applied shall
be deemed to have been granted as more than 60
days have lapsed which document is at Exh. 45 (in
cross). Further, he is also aware of Exh. 46, 47 which
are produced in cross which refers to the matter fixed
before the Minister for Labour and to the
Commissioner. He is also aware about the Order
passed by the Appropriate Authority which is at Exh.
48 Colly (in cross) stating that the application filed
by the Company on 07-09-2007 retrenching 13
workmen is dismissed. He is aware of Exh. 49 and 50
(produced in cross) wherein vide Exh. 50 the Hon’ble
High Court disposed the Writ Petition on 17-09-2014
quashing and setting aside the Order dated
02-06-2008 of the Appropriate Authority.
24. In short, he is aware of all the correspondence
and the various stages that took place prior to
retrenchment and during the course of retrenchment
of the said workmen. He has admitted in cross that
after the closure of Tablet and Capsule Division, the
Company never started manufacturing of the said
products till date.
25. The second witness Shri Prashant Naik was
also retrenched from his services by the Party II w.e.f.
22-06-2007 and he has admitted in cross that the
Tablet Department was closed from 22-06-2007 and
he was continuously employed by the Party II in the
Tablet Department till he was retrenched from the
services. In chief he has stated that there was no
separate Tablet Department of the Party II at the time
of their termination and in cross he states that he
was working in Ointment Department and so also he
is working in the same Department at the time when
his deposition was recorded. He has admitted in cross
that separate machineries are required for
manufacture of tablets and capsules and separate
machinery is required for ointment and ointment
cannot be manufactured on the machineries meant
for tablets and capsules. He admits that the Tablet
Department remained idle from 22-06-2007 to July,
2008 and during this time he was in Tablet
Department and packing ointment which shows that
he does not wish to disclose as to in which exact
department he was working at the relevant time. He
admits that he has no document to show that during
the above period they were all in the Tablet
Department packing ointment.
26. He has admitted that they were given
Appointment Letters by the Party II whereas in his
Affidavit-in-Evidence he has stated that none of the
employees involved in the present reference were
given any letter appointing them in the Tablet
Department. Hence, the falsity of this witness is thus
established. He has admitted all the admissions
accepted by the first witness and therefore the same
are not repeated. He is aware that the Company had
filed an application u/s 25-N of the Industrial
Disputes Act for the workers working in Tablet and
Capsule Department and he is also aware of the Order
passed by the Director, FDA directing Party II to close
the Tablet and Capsule Department. He has admitted
that he was paid retrenchment compensation as well
as all other legal dues by the Company and he does
not know when they raised the dispute before the
Labour Commissioner. He admits that the Company
engages temporary and contract workers as and
when there is temporary increase in the work. He
admits that they have not written any letter to the
Company mentioning about the alleged
discrepancies as mentioned in Para-6 of his Affidavit
in Evidence which refers to the fact that the Party II
allowed their manufacturing licence to lapse and did
not take any steps to renew it as they could have
very well complied with the notice and got the
licence renewed which shows that the allegations
of the workman are in air without the support of any
documents. He has admitted that they were called
2366
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
back for the work whenever the Factory used to start
and the contract workers and so also the temporary
workers used to get breaks on account of shut-down.
He admits Exh. 55 (produced in cross) which is a letter
made to him by the Company, the contents of which
are self-explanatory which refers to the closure of
the Tablet Department and the closure of the Capsule
Department.
27. The third witness of the Party I Shri Prakash
Naik was working as a Helper with the Party II till his
retrenchment by the Company and he has stated the
details in his Affidavit-in-Evidence and in his
cross-examination, he has admitted that he was
working in Tablet Department when the said
Department was closed and all the workmen working
in the Tablet Department were retrenched on
22-06-2007 and he also admitted that the Tablet
Department never started again and only Ointment
Department is functioning. He has totally
corroborated to all the admissions made by the 1st
and 2nd witness of the Party I and he does not know
whether the Order of Reference mentions whether
their retrenchment w.e.f. 03-07-2008 is legal and
justified. He also admitted that the machinery used
in the Tablet Department cannot be used in Ointment
Department. He further admitted that at the time
when the offer of employment was made the Company
required only Helpers. He could not give any details
as to which of the workmen of the Party I were
working in the Ointment Department. He is aware
that the Government accepted the closure of the
Tablet Department by virtue of the fact that 60 days
have passed after the application as per Section
25-N (V-B) of the Industrial Disputes Act. He admits
that he did not file any complaint that the Company
took opportunity to remove permanent employees
and replace them with temporary and contract basis
employees. He also admits that some of the workmen
accepted the employment in the Ointment Division
and till date they are working and he was also given
an offer of employment in the Ointment Division.
28. The 4th witness of the Party I is Shri Ulhas
Kanekar who was working as a Machine Operator
with the Party II from 02-03-2000 and was
continuously employed with them till his
retrenchment on the closure of the Tablet Department
w.e.f. 22-06-2007. In his cross-examination, he has
admitted all the admissions made by the first three
witnesses and hence the same are not mentioned
again so as to avoid its repetition. He has stated in
cross that the present Union has not filed any
objections to the Government on the application for
retrenchment and he does not have nor he filed any
document to show that he is a Member of the present
Union. He admitted that no Resolution has been filed
for raising the dispute by the Union and he also
stated in cross that the Tablet Department and
Ointment Department are situated at different
locations and further stated that all the workers
concerned in the dispute were offered employed and
so also the workers whose names are mentioned in
the Order of Reference were also offered employment
but he refused to accept and 4 workmen accepted
the employment. He is aware of the closure of the
Tablet Department by the Government Order and
above all he has clearly stated that retrenchment
compensation and other dues were offered at the
time of retrenchment and he has received the Demand
Draft to that effect.
29. The 5th witness of the Party I is Shri Anand
Kotharkar who was appointed by the Party II as
Operator in the year 2005 till his retrenchment w.e.f.
22-06-2007. This witness has also admitted all the
admissions made in cross by the first 4 witnesses
and according to him he was working in the Tablet
Department which was closed from 22-06-2007 and
he has admitted that he was paid the retrenchment
compensation as well as all the other legal dues. He
admits the separate functioning and separate
location of Tablet and Ointment Department and he
does not know when they raised the dispute before
the Labour Commissioner. He is aware of Exh. 55 and
since the cross-examination is exactly the same as
that of the other witnesses, the same is again not
repeated.
30. The last witness is Shri Vasudev Gaude who
was appointed by the Party II from 01-03-1991 and
the senior most Operator continuously employed with
the Party II till his retrenchment. In his cross-
-examination, he has admitted all the admissions
made by the first 5 witnesses. He admits that the
Tablet Department was closed on the basis of
instructions from the Government and Tablet and
Ointment Department are situated at different
locations according to him. He has admitted that he
has received the retrenchment compensation and
other legal dues offered at the time of retrenchment
as he received the cheque and he also admits that
other workers concerned in the reference were
offered employment and out of them only four
accepted. It is to be noted here that he precisely
admitted that the Plant was not suitable for
functioning therefore the Government asked them
to close the said Department. Rest of the cross
examination is the same as that of the other
witnesses.
31. Hence, all this goes to show that the Party II
was justified in their action of retrenchment and
Party II has complied with Section 25-G of the
Industrial Disputes Act. It is to be noted here that
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2367
the Party I has not raised a dispute before the Labour
Commissioner stating that the Party II has violated
Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act therefore
they are estopped from raising a dispute for which
no demand has been raised with the Management
and infact the dispute raised before the Labour
Commissioner only states that the Party II has
retrenched the 7 workers in violation of Section 25-F
and Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act. The
Minutes of conciliation proceeding and the Failure
Report at Exh. 37 and 38 state that the Management
had not followed the principle of “last come first go”
and as such the action of the Management in
retrenching the 7 workers is illegal and unjustified
and in violation of Section 25-H of the Industrial
Disputes Act. The Union has never claimed that the
Section 25-H was violated before the Labour Court
and the dispute raised was specifically for violation
of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act.
32. All the above contentions that the Party II has
violated Section 25-N is without any basis and are
unjustified and Party I is estopped from claiming any
violation of Section 25-H when the dispute raised
was for violation of Section 25-H. It is also to be noted
here that the workers could not be employed on a
permanent basis as no permanent vacancies had
arisen and the employment offered was what was
available with the Party II. The Party II could not
create vacancies just for these 7 workmen and in any
event the Party II has complied with Section 25-G
and 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
33. Learned Advocate Shri M. S. Bandodkar at this
juncture has placed reliance on the authority
reported in the case of Sindhu Resettlement V/s
Industrial Tribunal reported in 1968 1 LLJ 834
wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that “If
no dispute at all is raised by the employees with the
Management, any request sent by them to the
Government would only be a demand by them and
not an industrial dispute between them and their
Employer. An industrial dispute, as defined, must be
a dispute between employers and workmen. The
Government as to come to an opinion that an industrial
dispute does exist and that opinion can only be formed
on the basis that there was a dispute between the
employee and the employer”.
34. It is an admitted fact that permission is deemed
to have been granted by the Government under
Section 25-N(4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
and the same has not been challenged before any
Court after the High Court Order. The Party II states
that admittedly permission for retrenching the
workmen concerned in the reference has been
granted by the Appropriate Authority which attains
finality when the same was not challenged before
any Court or Tribunal by the workmen concerned in
the reference.
35. The Party II has produced documents at Exh.
83 to 104 which clearly show that individual notice
dated 26-06-2008 had been sent to all the workers
concerned in the Order of reference giving them 3
months’ Notice Pay and retrenchment compensation
under Section 25-F and these documents have been
admitted by the Party I and therefore, the Party I
cannot claim that no notice in the prescribed form is
not given to the workers individually. It is also not
in dispute that the workmen have received notice
pay as per Section 25-N(1). Section 25-N(1)(a)
contemplates that a 3 months’ notice must be given
to the workmen indicating reasons for retrenchment
or the workmen has been paid in lieu of such notice,
wages for the period of the notice. The Party II has
produced documents at Exh. 83 to 104 and has shown
that the Party II has opted for paying wages for 3
months in lieu of the notice as contemplated in
Section 25-N(1)(a). Therefore, the Party II does not
need to give any notice in the form PA as per Rule
76-A(1) and the submission of the Party I in this regard
must be therefore rejected.
36. It is to be noted here that the manufacturing of
products was happening in 2 separate buildings. The
FDA after inspection found that the Tablet and
Capsules Department was not Schedule-M
compliance and therefore directed the Party II to stop
manufacturing of tablets and capsules in the building
which manufactured tablets and capsules.
37. It is the objection raised by Learned Advocate
Shri S. Gaonkar for the Party I that the retrenchment
claimed by the Party II on the basis of the deemed
permission is not justified as the FDA in its Order
dated 20-06-2007 Exh.40 (produced in cross) did not
force the Party I to retrench its workers nor they asked
the Party II to close down the Department and the
FDA merely asked Party II to comply with the
statutory requirements and till that time told them
not to manufacture tablets and capsules. I am not at
all in agreement with these objections raised for the
simple reason that as a careful perusal of Exh. 40 in
its Para-2 has clearly given directions to the Party II
to stop forthwith the manufacturing of the tablets
and capsule products at your above premises till
further orders and to report compliance within 48
hours. Hence, by this Order, the Party II had no option
but to close the tablet production and all the
witnesses examined by the Party I have clearly
admitted in their cross-examination that they were
offered re-employment by the Management but these
workmen refused the same. The witnesses have
specifically mentioned that out of them 4 workmen
2368
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
accepted the offer of re-employment. The witnesses
have also admitted that the Company never started
manufacturing the tablet and capsule production till
date.
38. The first witness has admitted in cross that
they have not addressed any letter to the Company
that they were forced to take up the offer of temporary
employment before the Labour Commissioner. The
2nd witness has admitted that the Company engages
temporary and contract workers as and when there
is temporary increase in the work. He has also
admitted that they were called back for the work
whenever the Factory starts. The 3rd witness has
admitted in cross that after the retrenchment he was
given the offer of employment in the Ointment
Division and further admitted that some of the
workmen accepted the employment in the Ointment
Division and till today they are working. He has also
admitted that he did not file any complaint that the
Company took opportunity to remove permanent
employees and replace them with the temporary and
contract employees. The 4th witness Shri Ulhas
Kanekar has also admitted that the offer of
re-employment was made by the Company to them
and he was also offered the employment in the
Ointment Department along with the other workers
but he refused to accept. He has further admitted
that the present Union did not file any objections to
the Government on the application for retrenchment
and above all none of the witnesses have produced
their membership documents to show that they are
the members of the said Union. All the six witnesses
have admitted in cross that they were paid
retrenchment compensation and all the other legal
dues and the fact that some of these workmen have
deliberately refused to deposit the said cheque and
has returned to the Company is all together a
different aspect for which the Management is not
responsible. The Party II has complied with all the
required provisions for pre-retrenchment and post
retrenchment.
39. The allegations of unfair labour practices is
not all proved by the Party I. The objections raised by
Adv. Shri S. Gaonkar that the Party II has only stated
that retrenchment compensation was paid and there
is no proof of the same does not hold any weightage
as I have mentioned above that all the witnesses of
the Party I have clearly admitted of having received
the retrenchment compensation and all the other
legal dues and therefore the Company has no burden
to produce these documents as admission is the best
evidence which is a settled law. The Company has
complied the provisions of 25-N of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 and it is also come on record by
way of admission from the witnesses of the Party I
that the Tablet Manufacturing Department and the
Ointment Department were located at different
locations and machinery used for both is also
separate.
40. Adv. Shri S. Gaonkar has placed reliance on
the authority reported in the case of Workmen v/s
Subong Tea Estate 1967 AIR 420 wherein the Apex
Court has held that “in dealing with the question of
retrenchment in the light of the relevant provisions to
which we have just referred, it is, however, necessary
to bear in mind that the Management can retrench its
employees only for proper reasons. It is undoubtedly
true that it is for the Management to decide the
strength of its labour force, for the number of workmen
required to carry out efficiently the work involved in
the industrial undertaking of any Employer must
always be left to be determined by the management in
its discretion, and so, occasions may arise when the
number of employees may exceed the reasonable and
legitimate needs of the undertaking. In such a case, if
any workmen become surplus, it would be open to the
Management to retrench them. Workmen may become
surplus on the ground of rationalization or on the
ground of economy reasonably and bona fide adopted
by the Management, or of other industrial or trade
reasons. In all these cases, the Management would be
justified in effecting retrenchment in its labour force.
Thus, though the right of the Management to effect
retrenchment cannot normally be questioned, when a
dispute arises before an Industrial Court in regard to
the validity of any retrenchment, it would be necessary
for industrial adjudication to consider whether the
impugned retrenchment was justified for proper
reasons. It would not be open to the Management
either capriciously or without any reason at all to say
that it proposes to reduce its labour force for no rhyme
or reason. This position cannot be seriously disputed.”
41. The position in relation to violation of Section
25-O has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Oswal Agro Furane Ltd. and another V/s Oswal
Agro Furane Workers Union and others reported in
(2005) 3 SCC 224. The question arose as to whether
the provisions of Section 25-O of the Industrial
Disputes Act is imperative in nature. After holding
that the provision is held to be constitutionally valid,
the Apex Court has held that “A bare perusal of the
provisions contained in Sections 25-N and 25-O of the
Act leaves no manner of doubt that the Employer who
intends to close down the undertaking and/or effect
retrenchment of workmen working in such industrial
establishment, is bound to apply for prior permission
at least ninety days before the date on which the
intended closure is to take place. They constitute
conditions precedent for effecting a valid closure,
whereas the provisions of Section 25-N of the Act
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2369
provide for conditions precedent to retrenchment;
Section 25-O speaks of procedure for closing down an
undertaking. Obtaining a prior permission from the
Appropriate Government, thus, must be held to be
imperative in character.”
42. I have perused both the above authorities in
deciding the instant case and there is no dispute
about the settled position of law but the facts of the
present case are totally different from the above
mentioned cases as in the instant case, the Party II
has complied with the mandatory provisions of
Section 25-N and the Party II has closed the Tablet
Department in view of the Government Order and
the deeming provision as discussed above and the
deeming provisions under Section 25-N (4) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 on account of passing
of the 60 days from the filing of the application by
the Party II.
43. It is noticed that the Party I has not disputed
the reasons for retrenchment u/s 25-N and in fact the
dispute was raised in respect of violation of Section
25-H and not u/s 25-N. Section 25-H of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 refers to re-employment to be
mandatorily offered in case the need for recruiting
workers arises and not fresh or temporary
employment as offered to the workers and in the
present case, the Company offered the employment
to all the aggrieved workers and offering the
workmen the employment in the present reference
of temporary employment has been complied by the
Party II. (Para 61 of Exh.105) and moreover, the
question of violation of Section 25-H does not arise
as the Party II offered in writing to engage the 7
workmen for the work available of unskilled workers
on temporary basis as per the requirement of the
Factory.
44. There is nothing on record to show that the
Party II has employed any new workmen on
permanent basis as there is no documentary evidence
produced to that effect by the Party I. In fact, the
witnesses of the Party I are not aware of any details
about the employment given to the new employees
and the engagement of temporary workers by the
Party II is fully within the provisions of law. The
witnesses of Party I themselves have admitted in
cross that the Company used to engage the temporary
workers depending on the production basis and the
retrenchment of the permanent workers in the Tablet
and Capsule Division was only due to the closure
directions received from the FDA.
45. It is also come on record that all the workmen
concerned in the reference were retrenched at the
relevant time while they were working in the Tablet
and Capsule Division and all the witnesses have
admitted that they were working in the Tablet and
Capsule Department at the time of retrenchment. The
witnesses are also aware as to why the Tablet
Department was closed down and they are also
conversant with the necessary steps and
correspondences which took place at that time.
46. The Party II has never claimed that the 2
Departments were not under one license. It is
submitted that having one license for both the
divisions does not disprove the existence of two
separate divisions. The Party II submits that many
departments can exists under one license, therefore
the argument of the Party I that the Management is
estopped from contending that 2 departments are
different and distinct, is flawed and shows non-
-application of mind and based on incorrect
understanding of the statements made by the
Party I. It is a specifically admitted position by all the
workmen concerned in the Order of Reference that
workmen which were retrenched at the relevant time
were working in the Tablet and Capsule Division
which was not Schedule-M compliant and the
documentary proof would be need for propositions
which are in dispute. Since all the workmen have
admitted that they were working in the Tablet and
Capsule Division at the time of retrenchment, the
same does not need to be proved.
47. It is seen that the Party I has never put forth
the case that the Party II has violated Section 25-O of
the Industrial Disputes Act. This argument is taken
for the first time in Written Arguments and the
provisions of Section 25-N(4) and Section 25-O(3) are
in the parimateria being that rigors of the application
under Section 25-N are in fact more stringent. The
Party II having complied with Section 25-N for
retrenchment of workmen does not need to apply for
permission under Section 25-O and the submission
of the Party I that the Party II was duty bound to take
permission u/s 25-O if flawed and is not based on the
correct interpretation and appreciation of provisions
of Section 25-N and Section 25-O.
48. Admittedly, the Party II had applied and was
granted deemed permission for retrenchment and it
seems that the Party I was trying to take benefit of
the Party II’s defense instead of its own pleadings. It
is submitted that the Party I had to prove its case on
their pleadings and couldn’t take benefit of the
weakness of the Party II’s case. In any case, the Party
II has not closed the Ointment Division which is based
on the same license, therefore the Party II has
correctly applied for permission for retrenchment
under Section 25-N and has never intended to close
the Bethora Factory, therefore the permission for the
retrenchment was applied for only the Tablet and
Capsule Division which was shut as per directions of
FDA.
2370
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
49. Since it is seen that the Party I has failed in
proving the burden of Issue No.1 then automatically
Issue No. 2 also needs to be answered in the negative
because the retrenchment is totally justified,
therefore the question of re-instatement of the Party
I with full back wages with continuity in the service
along with other consequential benefits does not
arise.
50. Further it is seen that the Company had offered
employment as temporary workmen and they were
employed as unskilled workers as that was the only
job with the Company which fact is also admitted by
the witness of the Party I and even otherwise the
Company is not entitled to offer employment as they
have complied with Sections 25-G and 25-H of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Company by letter
dated 04-11-2014 Exh. 28 replied to letter dated
13-10-2014 that the workmen were employed as in
unskilled category and they did not want to join
either House-keeping or Security Department,
therefore they were made to join temporarily in
unskilled category. Further it is seen that the demand
of the Union is itself bad in law and since the
reference has been arising out of this demand of the
union which can be seen from letter dated
23-05-2016 at Exh. 30 which demand has not been
raised before the Management, the entire demand
itself is bad in law and not being an industrial dispute
out to be rejected.
51. Further, it is seen that though the dispute has
been raised by the Union before the Assistant Labour
Commissioner, there was no demand raised before
the Management prior to that or thereafter and since
no demand has been raised before the Management,
the alleged dispute raised before the Assistant
Labour Commissioner prior to that by the Union is
itself bad in law.
52. The Party II examined Shri Eurico Noronha who
was working with the Party II from April, 2008 to
March, 2019 as Vice President, Human Resources and
working as Advisor, Human Resources. He is
conversant with the facts of the case and his cross-
-examination could not be disturbed on any ground.
He has precisely stated in cross that the Company
is manufacturing ointment and apart from
manufacturing ointment there is no other
manufacturing activity as of date. The documents
produced by him are from Exh. 83 to Exh. 104 and the
next witness examined by the Company is Shri Ajit
Shinkre working as an Asst. Manager and then as
Production Manager for the Party II. He is also
conversant with the facts of the present case and
the documents produced by him are from Exh. 69 to
Exh. 73 Colly. He has admitted in cross that they have
re-employed some of the workmen in the reference
in unskilled category and no permanent workmen
are working in Stores and all the permanent workers
are working in the Production Department. He has
also produced the list of permanent workmen
working in the Production Department which is at
Exh. 74. He has produced the ESI Returns from July,
2019 to December, 2019 which is at Exh. 76 Colly and
PF Returns from July, 2019 to December, 2019 at Exh.
77 Colly (produced in cross). He precisely states
further that as per Clause-5 of Exh. 78 the workman
is liable to be transferred from one department to
another. He has also stated in cross that they had
asked the retrenched workers to work on the
Machine even very recently and they have even
employed 40 to 50 temporary workers whenever there
was production. He has admitted in cross that they
had obtained permission from the Appropriate
Authority before retrenchment of the workers and
the Appropriate Authority had granted permission
within 60 days and after a period of eight months the
Appropriate Authority rejected the permission and
further added and stated that the Hon’ble High Court
had quashed the Rejection Order of the Appropriate
Authority in the year 2014.
53. It is seen that the Party II has complied with all
the mandatory conditions preceding to a valid
retrenchment i.e. there is compliance of Section
25-N wherein the Employer has to decide and
identify to retrench the workmen in various
categories and departments of their establishments
and the Employer is required to make an application
to obtain the permission of the Appropriate
Government i.e. the notice for permission for
retrenchment to be given by an Employer under
Section 25-N(b)(i) of the said Act and once the
application is made for permission, the Employer
should wait till the permission is given or period of
60 days from the date of making such application
has expired when the permission will be deemed to
have been granted and apart from giving such a
notice, the wages in lieu of the notice, the Employer
is also required by sub-section 9 to pay compensation
to the workman who is proposed to be retrenched
and as far as giving of notice to a workman is
concerned, such notice has been already given to
retrench them at any time, before or after obtaining
the permission or retrench them forthwith on
obtaining the permission by giving three months’
wages in lieu of the notice. All these requirements
are duly complied by the Party II.
54. In the Judgment passed in the Indian Hume
Pipe Company v/s Bhimarao Baliram Gajbhiya
dated 07-07-1965, it is clearly stated that
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2371
“re-employment cannot be on same terms and
conditions if vacancies are not available”. No evidence
has been come on record that there were vacancies
of Operators wherein employees were employed.
Since vacancies were of temporary nature, they were
employed. Further it is pertinent to note that these
workers were offered employment and they had
refused the employment. The Order of Reference is
limited order and does not talk about Section 25-H
and the dispute earlier raised was closed. In view
the above, nothing survives in the matter and the
reference ought to be rejected.
55. The ratio applied in the above case gets
squarely attracted to the facts of the present case
and hence, in view of the above reasons, Issue No. 1
and 2 are answered in the negative.
Issue No. 3:
56. The above reference is not maintainable as the
action of Party II in retrenching the workmen from
services w.e.f. 03-07-2008 is legal, justified and has
been done by following and complying the relevant
provisions relating to retrenchment of the industrial
Disputes Act and as such the Party I is not entitled
for any relief of re-instatement with full back wages
and with continuity in the services nor they are
entitled for any consequential benefits. The workmen
after the retrenchment have already been paid the
retrenchment compensation and the legal dues
which is admitted by them in their evidence.
57. While retrenching the workmen, the Party II
has followed the required provisions of Section 25-N
of the Act and if one goes through Exh. 42 to 52 it is
seen that the closure was also legal and the
retrenchment was done due to legal and justified
reasons. The Party II was having two divisions, one
Tablet Division and the other was Ointment Division.
All the workmen employed in the Tablet Division
were retrenched and the Party II is running only one
division i.e. the Ointment Division which is not in
dispute that the Company even today is running only
Ointment Division and the Tablet Department
has been shut down due to non-compliance of
Schedule-M.
58. The Government also while acting under
Section 25-N(4) has accepted that retrenchment is
legal and justified and therefore reference itself is
bad in law and on that ground itself the reference
ought to be rejected and also because there is a delay
in making the reference which is dated 07-05-2017.
The Company had filed Writ Petition bearing No. WP/
/557/2008 challenging the Order of the Labour
Minister dated 02-06-2008 and the Hon’ble High
Court had dismissed the Impugned Order dated
02-06-2008 by its Order dated 17-09-2014 clearly
holding that the Impugned order dated 02-06-2008
passed by the Appropriate Authority u/s 25-N of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is quashed and set
aside.
59. Even otherwise it is seen that the Party I has
not raised any Demand Notice on the Party II prior to
the notice received by the Management from the
Asst. Labour Commissioner and as the Party I has not
raised the dispute before the Labour Commissioner
stating that the Party II has violated the provisions of
Section 25 of the Industrial Disputes Act, they are
estopped from raising a dispute for not raising the
demand with the Management. In fact, the dispute
raised before the Labour Commissioner/Exh. 30 only
mentions that the Party II had retrenched 7 workers
in violation of Section 25-F and Section 25-H of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The ratio held in the
case of Sindhu Resettlement V/s Industrial Tribunal
as discussed above, gets squarely attracted to the
facts of the present case. Hence, in view of the above
reasons, Issue No. 3 stands answered in the
affirmative.
60. Hence, in view of the above reasons and guided
by the above authority, it is abundantly clear that
Party I has failed to establish its case and accordingly,
they are not entitled to any relief.
Accordingly, I pass the following Order:
O R D E R
1. The action of the Management of M/s Indi
Pharma Private Limited, Plot No. 2-9, Bethora
Industrial Estate, Bethora, Goa in retrenching
the seven workmen mentioned in the Order of
Reference with effect from 03-07-2008, is legal
and justified.
2. The Party I/Workmen are not entitled for any
relief.
3. No order as to cost.
4. Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Bela N. Naik)
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal and
Labour Court.
———uuu———
Department of Law & Judiciary
Law (Establishment) Division
–––
Order
No. 8/8/2018-LD(Estt.)/Part-I/1631
The Government of Goa through Law Department
and Registration Department has implemented
2372
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
Online Marriage Registration System from
16-11-2022. It has been an endeavor of the
Government to ensure minimum Government and
maximum Governance to facilitate its citizens and
strengthen the case of living of its citizens.
In this context, the Marriage Registration System
is now improvised and the concept of digitally signed
marriage certificate with QR Code is hereby
introduced for Online Marriage Registration System.
The marriage certificate with watermark of
Government of Goa, signed digitally by Civil
Registrar-cum-Sub-Registrar of the respective
jurisdiction shall be considered authentic and the
only type of certificate issued by the office of Civil
Registrars-cum-Sub-Registrars. In order to ensure
security and for authentication of the said marriage
certificate, the citizens and the concerned
authorities before whom these certificates would be
produced are enabled to verify the same by scanning
the QR Code which is printed on the marriage
certificates. Further the said certificate can be
verified from the Department’s Website: https://
registration.goa.gov.in and Goa Government Portal.
Amir Y. Parab, Under Secretary (Law-Estt.).
Porvorim, 12th October, 2022.
————
Notification
No. 14-18-2022-LD (Estt.)1637
The following Notification No. Rule/P.1616/2022
dated 23-09-2022 which has been issued by the
High Court of Judicature at Bombay, is hereby
published for general information of the public.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Amir Y. Parab, Under Secretary (Law-Estt.).
Porvorim, 12th October, 2022.
No. Rule/P.1616/2022
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
Appellate Side
Notification
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section
4(1) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at
Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal)
Act, 2013 and in partial modification of the earlier
Notification No. Rule/P.1616/2019 dated 06th June,
2019 regarding constitution of “The Gender
Sensitization Internal Complaints Committee” to
deal with the complaints if any, of Sexual
Harassment of any woman at work place, the
Hon’ble the Chief Justice is pleased to re-constitute
“The Gender Sensitization Internal Complaints
Committee” for the High Court of Bombay, at Goa
as under:-
Name of the
The Gender Sensitization
workplace
Internal Complaints
Committee
1
2
High Court of
:
1. Hon’ble Smt. Justice
Bombay, at Goa
Anuja Prabhudessai,
Presiding Officer.
2. Hon’ble Shri Justice
B. P. Deshpande, Member.
3. Smt. Anarkali Agni, Senior
Advocate, Member.
4. Smt. Carmina Mascarenhas,
Member.
5. Ms. Vijaya V. Ambre,
Member Secretary, GSLSA,
Member.
6. Ms. Apurva R. Nagvenkar,
Deputy Registrar, High
Court of Bombay at Goa,
Member.
7. Ms. Susan Linahres,
Advocate, Member.
8. Mrs. Norma Alvares,
Advocate, Member.
9. Mrs. Geeta P. Naik,
Assistant, High Court of
Bombay at Goa, Member.
High Court of Judicature
Sd/-
at Bombay
(MAHENDRA W.
CHANDWANI),
Dated: 23rd September, 2022. Registrar General.
———uuu———
Department of Personnel
–––
Order
No. 6/10/2017-PER/Part/3303
On the recommendation of the Goa Services Board,
the Governor of Goa is pleased to order the transfer
and posting of the following Senior Scale Officers of
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2373
Goa Civil Service, in public interest, with immediate effect:-
Sr. Name and present posting of the officer Posted as
No.
1.
Shri Deepesh N. Priolkar,
Director (Administration), Sports Authority of Goa
Member Secretary, Goa Football
will additional charge of Member Secretary, Goa
Development Council
Football Development Council.
2.
Shri Manuel P. Barreto,
Chief Officer, Margao Municipal Council.
Chief Executive Officer, South Goa Zilla
Panchayat
3.
Shri Meghanath Porob,
Secretary, Goa Konkani Academy.
awaiting posting
4.
Smt. Upasana Mazgaonkar,
Director of Museum.
Director, Institute of Provedoria
5.
Shri Shankar Gaonkar,
Director (Administration), Water Resources
Director (Administration), Sports
Department.
Authority of Goa
6.
Ms. Biju Naik,
Secretary, Goa Human Rights Commission.
Director (Administration), Water
Resources Department
7.
Smt. Sangeeta S. Naik,
Additional Director Panchayat-II, South.
Additional Collector-III, North Goa
8.
Shri Pravin M. S. Barad,
Project Director, DRDA, South.
Secretary, Goa Konkani Academy with
additional charge of Project Director,
DRDA, South
9.
Shri Rohit Ashok Kadam,
Chief Executive Officer, South Goa Zilla
Chief Officer, Margao Municipal Council
Panchayat.
10.
Smt. Florina S. Colaco,
Chief Executive Officer, North Goa Zilla
Additional Director of Panchayat-II, South
Panchayat.
11.
Shri Gaurish Shankhwalkar,
Joint Secretary to Governor.
Chief Executive Officer, North Goa Zilla
Panchayat with additional charge of
Joint Secretary to Governor
12.
Shri Pundalik Khorjuenkar,
Additional Collector-III, North Goa.
Director of Museum
13.
Shri Vinayak Volvoikar,
Director, Institute of Provedoria.
Additional Director of Vigilance-II
Shri V. P. Dangui, Additional Secretary to Chief Minister shall also hold the charge of Additional
Secretary (Administrative Reforms), in addition to his own duties.
Smt. Maya Pednekar, Additional Director of Vigilance-I shall also hold the charge of Additional Director
of Vigilance-II, in addition to her own duties.
The officers appointed on ex-cadre deputation post shall be governed by the standard terms of deputation.
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.
Nathine S. Araujo, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 30th September, 2022.
2374
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
Department of Planning
Directorate of Planning, Statistics & Evaluation
––––
Notification (01)
No. DPSE/IV-AGRI CEN-4/2022-23/2115
Consequent upon the decision of the Government
of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers
Welfare’s decision to conduct the 11th Agriculture
Census (Ref. year 2021-22) in the Country and as
recommended in the Operational Guidelines for
implementing Agriculture Census 2021-22,
Government of Goa is pleased to designate the
following Officers for the effective and smooth
conduct of the 11th Agriculture Census 2021-22
which is being conducted in Goa State during the
year 2022-23 as follows:
1. Secretary (Agriculture)
: Agriculture Census
Commissioner.
2. Director of Planning,
: Deputy Agriculture
Statistics & Evaluation,
Census
Porvorim
Commissioner.
3. District Collector,
: District Agriculture
North Goa
Census Officer, North
Goa District (DACO).
4. District Collector,
: District Agriculture
South Goa
Census Officer, South
Goa District (DACO).
5. Mamlatdars of Tiswadi, : Taluka Level Charge
Bardez, Pernem, Bicholim,
Officers (TLCO).
Sattari, Salcete, Mormugao,
Quepem, Sanguem,
Canacona, Dharbandora
and Ponda
Duties/Responsibilities
1. Agriculture Census Commissioner will be the
overall in-charge of the Census in Goa State.
2. Deputy Agriculture Census Commissioner will
assist Agriculture Census Commissioner in all
respects, related to the census.
3. District Agriculture Census Officers (DACO)
will be the overall in-charge of respective District
and Talukas therein. They will guide and monitor
the duties of Mamlatdars in appointing enumerators
from amongst Group B (Non-Gazetted) and Group C
Officials from various Departments. In the absence
of Mamlatdar, the Joint Mamlatdar will act as the
link Officer in concerned talukas.
4. Taluka Level Charge Officers i.e. Mamlatdars
of every taluka shall be fully responsible for smooth
implementation of the Agriculture Census 2021-22.
The responsibilities of Taluka Level Charge
Officers/Mamlatdars include identification of the
field level staff namely Enumerators/Field
Interviewers and Supervisors in appropriate
numbers so as to cover the complete area under
their respective jurisdiction. The Taluka Level
Charge Officers/Mamlatdars shall finalize the
training plans and make necessary arrangements
for the training programme at suitable places in
the respective talukas. The Taluka Level Charge
Officers/Mamlatdars shall require to requisition the
services of Group B (Non-Gazetted) and Group C
Officials from amongst the Goa Government
Departments/Corporations/Agencies. The Taluka
Level Charge Officers/Mamlatdars while performing
these duties shall approach the concerned
Collector/District Agriculture Census Officer for any
administrative issues as regards to conduct of the
Census.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Vijay B. Saxena, Director & ex officio Joint
Secretary (Planning).
Porvorim, October, 2022.
–––––—
Notification (02)
No. DPSE/IV-AGRI CEN-4/2022-23/2116
Consequent upon the decision of the Government
of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers
Welfare’s decision to conduct the 11th Agriculture
Census (Ref. year 2021-22) in the Country and as
recommended in the Operational Guidelines for
implementing Agriculture Census 2021-22, the
Government of Goa is pleased to constitute a State
Level Coordination Committee (SLCC) comprising
of following Officers for the smooth and timely
conduct of the 11th Agriculture Census in Goa
during the year 2022-23:
1. Secretary (Agriculture)
— Chairman.
2. District Collector, North Goa
— Member.
3. District Collector, South Goa
— Member.
4. Director, Directorate
— Member.
of Agriculture
5. Director, Directorate
— Member.
of Settlement and
Land Records
6. State Informatics Officer,
— Member.
NIC, Goa
7. Representative of
—Member.
Ministry of Agriculture &
Farmers Welfare, Government
of India, New Delhi
8. Director of Planning,
— Member
Statistics & Evaluation,
Secretary.
Porvorim
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2375
The Committee shall be responsible for all aspects
related to the smooth and orderly conduct of the
Census including monitoring the progress of the
fieldwork and resolution of operational challenges
if any.
The Committee shall meet atleast once in three
months to review the progress of the Census work.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Vijay B. Saxena, Director & ex officio Joint
Secretary (Planning).
Porvorim, October, 2022.
–––––—
Notification (03)
No. DPSE/IV-AGRI CEN-4/2022-23/2117
Consequent upon the decision of the Government
of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers
Welfare’s decision to conduct the 11th Agriculture
Census (Ref. year 2021-22) in the Country and as
recommended in the Operational Guidelines for
implementing Agriculture Census, 2021-22, the
Government of Goa is pleased to constitute District
Level Co-ordination Committees (DLCC) comprising
of following Officers for the smooth and timely
conduct of the 11th Agriculture Census in Goa
during the year 2022-23:
North Goa District
1. District Collector, North Goa
: Chairman.
2. Deputy Collector, North Goa
: Member.
3. Mamlatdars, North Goa
: Members.
4. Zonal Agricultural Officers,
: Members.
North Goa
5. Dy. Director, Directorate of
: Member
Planning, Statistics &
Secretary.
Evaluation, Porvorim
South Goa District
1. District Collector, South Goa
: Chairman.
2. Deputy Collector, South Goa
: Member.
3. Mamlatdars, South Goa
: Members.
4. Zonal Agricultural Officers,
: Members.
South Goa
5. Dy. Director, Directorate of
: Member
Planning, Statistics &
Secretary.
Evaluation, Porvorim
The Committee shall meet atleast once in a month
to monitor and review the progress of the fieldwork
and shall be responsible to sort out all issues
concerning identification and appointment of staff
to carry out field duties and submit its report to the
Agriculture Census Commissioner and Deputy
Agriculture Census Commissioner.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Vijay B. Saxena, Director & ex officio Joint
Secretary (Planning).
Porvorim, October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Public Health
–––
Order
No. 7/6/90-I/PHD/Part/1203
Read:
Memorandum No. 7/6/90-I/PHD/Part/1009
dated 27-06-2022.
On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service
Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/
/I/5/24(8)/2021/97 dated 27-06-2022, Government is
pleased to appoint Dr. Ashwin Albert Dsouza to the
post of Junior Ophthalmic Surgeon (Group “A”
Gazetted) under Directorate of Health Services in
the Level 10 of Pay Matrix [Pay Band-3 Rs. 15600-
-39100 + Grade Pay Rs. 5400/- (pre-revised)].
Dr. Ashwin Albert Dsouza shall be on probation
for a period of two years.
Dr. Ashwin Albert Dsouza has been declared
medically fit by the Medical Board and that the
character and antecedents has been verified by
the District Magistrate, North Goa, Panaji vide letter
No. 2/11/2016-MAG/VCA/Vol.II/2252 dated
26-08-2022 and it is revealed that there is nothing
adverse reported against him.
Consequent upon his appointment, the above
doctor is posted at Community Health Centre,
Pernem against newly created post and deployed
to work at Community Health Centre, Sankhali and
once a week at Community Health Centre, Pernem.
By order and in the name of the Governor
of Goa.
Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).
Porvorim, 10th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Science and Technology
and Waste Management
–––
Notification
No. 5-4-2021/S&T&WM/781
Whereas, vide Proclamation No. 5-4-2021/
/S&T&WM/250 dated 10-06-2022, published in the
Official Gazette, Series II No. 11 dated
2376
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
16-06-2022 and local newspapers viz. “O Heraldo”
dated 11-06-2022 and “Bhangarbhui” dated
11-06-2022 (hereinafter called the “said
Proclamation”), the Government of Goa proposed
to:
a) declare the area as specified in the Schedule
hereto (hereinafter referred to as the “said
area”) as Waste Management area/site for the
purpose of establishing facilities for waste
management and waste disposal in terms of
Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 36 of
the Goa Waste Management Act, 2016 (Goa
Act 19 of 2016) (hereinafter referred to as the
“said Act”);
b) appoint Assistant Accounts Officer of the Goa
Waste Management Corporation (hereinafter
called as “said Officer”) for the purpose of the
assessment and recovery of taxes as per the
provisions of law as in force in the said area
in terms of Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of
Section 36 of the said Act;
c) declare that the provisons of any law relating
to local authorities providing for control and
erection of building, levy and collection of
taxes, fees and other dues to the local
authorities which are in force in said area
shall cease to apply thereof and the local
authorities which were recovering house tax
from the occupants, of the said area, under
their respective laws, shall be compensated
by the Government to the extent of the last
financial years collection of taxes, for period
of five years in terms of Clause (c) of sub-
section (1) of Section 36 of the said Act;
d) authorize the said Officer to exercise all
powers such as, control or erection of
buildings, levy and collection of taxes, fees
and other dues in respect of the said local
authorities, which are in force in the said area.
All such taxes, fees and other dues shall be
deposited with the Goa Waste Management
Corporation immediately, by the said officer,
after such collection is done (hereinafter
collectively called the “said proposals”) and
invited all persons, who have any objections
to the said proposals to submit the same in
writing with reasons therefor, to the Director,
Department of Science and Technology and
Waste Management, Porvorim-Goa, within one
month from the date of publication of said
proclamation in the Official Gazette.
And whereas, the said Official Gazette was made
available to the public on 16-06-2022;
And wheras, objection received from the public
on the said proposals have been duly considered
and examined by the Government and in view of
various orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of
Bombay at Goa and National Green Tribunal in the
various writ petitions/proceedings, the Government
of Goa is of the opinion that the said objections are
not tenable.
And wheras, Government, after duly considering
and examining the said objections, have seen that
the same are similar to the objections that were
raised during public hearing held on 28-07-2019 at
Village Panchayat Old Goa hall, Old Goa at the
time of grant of Environmental Clearance for the
proposed projects, for which satisfactory replies
were provided by the Government.
And whereas, the Goa State Environment Impact
Assessment Authority has granted Environment
Clearance dated 06-01-2020. And whereas, the said
Environmental Clearance dated 06-01-2020 has
been upheld by the Hon’ble National Green Tribunal
in O.A No. 14/2020(WZ).
Now, therefore, in excercise of the powers
conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 36 of the
said Act, the Government of Goa hereby:
(a) declares that the area as specified in the
Schedule hereto as Waste Management area/
/site for the purpose of establishing facilities
for waste management and waste disposal;
(b) declares that the provisions of any law relating
to local authorities providing for control and
erection of buildings, levy and collection of
taxes, fees and other dues to the local
authorities which are in force in said area
shall cease to apply thereof and the local
authorities which were recovering house tax
from the occupants of the said areas, under
their respective laws shall be compensated
by the Government to the extent of the last
financial years collection of taxes, for period
of five years;
(c) appoints Assistant Accounts Officer of the Goa
Waste Management Corporation for the
purpose of the assessment and recovery of
taxes as per the provisions of law as in force
in the said area; and
(d) authorizes the said Officer to exercise all
powers such as, control or erection of
buildings, levy and collection of taxes, fees
and other dues, in respect of said local
authorities, which are in force in the said area
and also directs that all such taxes, fees and
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
2377
other dues shall be deposited with the Goa
Waste Management Corporation, immediately,
by the said Officer, after such collection is
done.
SCHEDULE
(a) Area: 1,71,312 sq.m.
(b) Village: Bainguinim.
(c) Taluka: Tiswadi.
(d) Survey No.: 20/1-I, 20/2-A and 20/3-A-1 [Old
Survey No. 20/1(P), 20/2(P) & 20/3-A(P)].
(e) Boundaries
North: Survey No. 21/2, 20/1-J, 20/1-K.
South: Village Boundary of Gouli Moula.
East: Survey No. 19/1(P).
West: Survey No. 20/3-A(P), 20/3-B(P).
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dr. Levinson J. Martins, Director (S&T & WM) &
ex officio Jt. Secretary.
Porvorim, 14th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Directorate of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship
–––
Order
No. 10/75/TRG/SDCT/F-1/2014/1952
Sub.: Re-constitution of Governing Council of SCVT Society of Goa.
The State Government has constituted State Council of Vocational Training (SCVT) Society of Goa, a
society registered under Societies Registration Act, 1860 on 1st August, 2018 bearing Registered No. 313/
/GOA/2018 for purpose of implementation of various Skill Development Schemes in line with guidelines
issued by Ministry of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship (MSDE), Government of India.
The Governing Council of State Council of Vocational Training (SCVT) Society of Goa is hereby
re-constituted as under:-
Sr.
Particulars of
Designation on Governing
No.
Governing Council
Council under SCVT Society
1
2
3
1.
Secretary (SD&E), Government of Goa
Chairman.
2.
Director (SD&E), Directorate of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship
Member
Secretary.
3.
The Senior Manager (HR), Goa Shipyard Ltd., Vasco-Goa
Member.
4.
The Secretary, Mormugao Port Trust, Vasco-Goa
Member.
5.
Regional Director, Regional Directorate of Skill Development
Member.
& Entrepreneurship (RDSDE), DGT, MSDE, Government of India,
Sion-Mumbai or his representative
6.
The Principal, Farmagudi Government ITI
Member.
7.
The Principal, Sesa Private ITI, Sankhali-Goa
Member.
8.
The Director, State Council of Educational Research and Training
Member.
(SCERT), Porvorim-Goa or his representative
9.
The Director, Directorate of Education or his representative
Member.
10. The State General Secretary, Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS),
Member.
Goa Pradesh, Vaddem, Vasco-Goa
11. The Regional Manager (Engineering), Goa Industrial Development
Member.
Corporation, EDC Complex, Patto, Panaji-Goa
12. Dy. General Manager, Goa Tourism Development
Member.
Corporation (GTDC), Panaji-Goa
The Governing Council of State Council of Vocational Training (SCVT) Society of Goa shall be governed
by the extant ‘Memorandum of Association’ and ‘Rules and Regulations’ of the SCVT Society of Goa.
2378
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 29
20TH OCTOBER, 2022
The term of re-constituted Governing Council of
State Council of Vocational Training (SCVT) Society
of Goa shall be for period of three (03) years from
date of re-constitution.
As per the Clause 10.5 of the ‘Rules and
Regulations’ of the State Council of Vocational
Training (SCVT) Society of Goa, no member of the
Governing Council in that capacity be entitled to
receive remuneration except travel allowance for
attending the meeting, the quantum of which shall
be fixed from time to time by the Governing Council
with the approval of SCVT Society of Goa.
The Governing Council of State Council of
Vocational Training (SCVT) Society of Goa shall meet
as and when required or once in three months.
This issues with the approval of Competent
Authority.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dipak Desai, Director (Skill Development &
Entrepreneurship) & ex officio Additional Secretary.
Panaji, 4th October, 2022.
———uuu———
Department of Tribal Welfare
Directorate of Tribal Welfare
––––
Order
No. DTW/AD(N)/ECSC/2020-21/CSS-127/3333
Government is pleased to constitute the Steering
Committee under the Chairmanship of the Secretary,
Tribal Welfare for the development of content for
the Tribal Museum of Freedom Fighters of Tribal
Communities at Ponda.
The Steering Committee shall consist of the
following members, namely:-
1.
Secretary, Tribal Welfare
— Chairman.
2.
Director, Tribal Welfare
— Member.
3.
Dr. Arvind N. Haldankar,
— Member.
Programme Director
(Sociology), Goa University
4.
Dr. Nalini Naik, Assistant
— Member.
Professor (History),
Goa University
5.
Shri Balaji Shenvy, Archivist
— Member.
(Publication), Directorate
of Archives & Archaeology
6.
Dr. Subodh Kerkar,
— Member.
Artist & Curator,
Museum of Goa
7.
Smt. Natasha Fernandes
— Member.
Curator, Museum of
Christian Art
8.
Dr. Priyanka Velip, Assistant
— Member.
Professor, Sociology,
Government College of
Arts, Science and Commerce,
Quepem-Goa
9.
Shri Devidas Goankar, Writer
— Member.
10. Director, Tribal Research
— Member
Institute
Secretary.
The function of the Steering Committee will be
as follows:
1.
To plan and assist in the development of
content for the Museum.
2.
To collect the data and document the details
of the tribal freedom fighters of Goa and tribal
revolts in Goa.
3.
To develop story line for the Museum.
4.
To give suggestions for designing the civil
structure of the Museum for the DPR in view
of the development of content, curation,
galleries, collection of artifacts jewellery,
textiles, traditional games, etc.
This order is issued with the approval of the
Government.
By order and in the name of the Governor
of Goa.
Triveni Velip, Director (Tribal Welfare).
Panaji, 12th October, 2022.
www.goaprintingpress.gov.in
Published and Printed by the Director, Printing & Stationery,
Government Printing Press,
Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.
PRICE–Rs. 32.00
PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA—257/120—10/2022.