SERIES II No. 19
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410
Reg. No. RNP/GOA/32/2021-2023
Panaji, 10th August, 2023 (Sravana 19, 1945)
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
Department of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services
Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services
–––
Order
No. 2/2/79-AH(Part)/2023-24/2437
Government is pleased to order the transfer of the following Assistant Directors in the Directorate of
Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, with immediate effect and in public interest to the stations as
indicated against their names:-
Sr. No.
Name with designation
Present place of posting
Proposed place of posting
1.
Dr. Anuradha A. Naik,
Veterinary Hospital, Curti, Ponda
Government Piggery Farm,
Assistant Director (on
with additional charge of Key Village
Curti, Ponda with
officiating basis)
Scheme, Curti, Ponda & Government
additional charge of Key
Piggery Farm, Curti, Ponda
Village Scheme, Curti, Ponda.
2.
Dr. Rajesh G. Kenny,
Veterinary Hospital, Honda
Veterinary Hospital, Honda
Assistant Director
with additional charge of
Veterinary Hospital,
Curti, Ponda.
The Officers shall be entitled for transfer TA/DA as per rule, however if the transferee does not change
their place of residence from old station to new, they will not be entitled for transfer TA as per the Rules
in force.
The Officers shall join their new place of posting with immediate effect.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.
Dr. Agostinho Misquita, Director & ex officio Jt. Secretary (AH).
Panaji, 7th August, 2023.
Note:- There are two Extraordinary issues to the Official Gazette, Series II No. 18 dated 03-08-2023 as follows:-
(1) Extraordinary dated 04-08-2023 from pages 429 to 448 regarding Circulars from Department of
Finance.
(2) Extraordinary (No. 2) dated 07-08-2023 from pages 449 to 452 regarding Notifications from
Department of Elections.
453
Suggestions are welcomed on e-mail: [email protected]
454
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
Department of Co-operation
Office of the Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Societies
–––
Notification
No. 5-2008/2023/ARSZ/HSG/2162
In exercise of the powers vested in me under
Section 8 of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act,
2001, “Johella Apartments Co-operative Housing
Maintenance Society Ltd.”, Chandrawaddo, Fatorda,
Margao-Goa is registered under code symbol No.
RCSSZ2023240067.
Rajesh Parwar, Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative
Societies, South Zone.
Margao, 2nd August, 2023.
Certificate of Registration
“Johella Apartments Co-operative Housing
Maintenance Society Ltd.”, Chandrawaddo, Fatorda,
Margao-Goa has been registered on 02-08-2023 and
its bears registration code symbol No.
RCSSZ2023240067 and its classified as “Co-operative
Housing Society” under sub-classification “No.
7-(d)-Co-operative Housing Maintenance Society”
in terms of Rule 8 of the Goa Co-operative Societies
Rules, 2003.
Rajesh Parwar, Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative
Societies, South Zone.
Margao, 2nd August, 2023.
——————
Office of the Asstt. Election Officer/Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Societies
–––
No. 3/Elec-BOD/GYMPCSL/ARBZ/23-28/607
FORM “ELECTION-9”
(See Rule 74)
Election to the Board of Directors of “Goa Youth Multipurpose Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., Siddhivinayak
Apartments, Shop No. 8, Ground Floor, Harvalem, Sankhalim-Goa”.
Taluka:- Bicholim
District:- North Goa
Election for the period:- 2023-2028
Number of Seats:- 11 (Eleven)
Year of Election:- 2023
In pursuance of the provisions contained in the Goa Co-operative Societies Rules, 2003, I, declare that
the following contesting candidates have been duly elected to fill 09 seats on the Board of Directors of the above
society as they were the only contesting candidates.
General/Unreserved - for 08 (Eight) posts
Sr. No.
Name of the Nominee
Address
1
2
3
1.
Shri Pramod P. Sawant
Housing Board Colony, Sankhali-Goa.
2.
Shri Nitesh Krishna Naik
H. No. 01, Tale, Pale, Bicholim-Goa.
3.
Shri Dattaram Dinananth Chimulkar
H. No. 275, KTC Bus stand, Sankhali-Goa.
4.
Shri Santosh Pandurang Naik
H. No. 259, Bhamai, Pale-Goa.
5.
Shri Pradeep Gawde
H. No. 18, Talewada, Pale-Goa.
6.
Shri Manohar Krishna Valvoikar
Kadchal Surla, Sankhali-Goa.
7.
Shri Prajot P. Tirodkar
H. No. 207, Near Electricity Dept., Talematha, Pale-Goa.
8.
Vacant
Reserve for Women - 02 (Two) posts
Sr. No.
Name of the Nominee
Address
1.
Smt. Sulakshana P. Sawant
Housing Board Colony, Sankhali-Goa.
2.
Smt. Vibha Vishnu Gawas
H. No. 42, Ambegal, Pale-Goa.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
455
Reserve for ST/SC-01 (One) post
Sr. No.
Name of the Nominee
Address
1.
Vacant
I, also certify and declare that the above mentioned relevant number of seats to be elected to form the
Board of Directors of the above Society are duly elected.
Krishna M. Mhalshekar, Junior Auditor (Co-op. Societies) Bicholim Zone & Returning Officer for Election
to the BOD of Goa Youth Multipurpose Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., Siddhivinayak Apartments, Shop No. 8,
Ground Floor, Harvalem, Sankhalim-Goa.
Sankhali, 3rd August, 2023.
——————
Department of Education, Art & Culture
Directorate of Higher Education
–––
Order
No. ACADIII/GC/FILLING-ASST.PROF/115/2018/
/PARTIII/3859
Read:
Memorandun No. ACADIII/GC/FILLING-
ASSTT. PROF./115/2018/PART–III/38032 dated
20-03-2023.
On the recommendation of the Goa Public
Service Commission as conveyed vide their letter
No. COM//I/5/78(27)/2020/456 dated 25-01-2023,
Government is pleased to appoint Mr. Amey
Shrikant Sawaiker to the post of Assistant Professor
in Geography (Group “A” Gazetted) under PwD
category in Government College of Arts, Science
and Commerce, Khandola under Directorate of
Higher Education on temporary basis in the UGC
Pay Scale Matrix Level 10 with immediate effect,
and as per the terms and conditions contained in
the Memorandum cited above. He shall be on
probation for a period of two years.
Mr. Amey Shrikant Sawaiker has been declared
medically fit by the Medical Board. The character
and antecedents have been verified by the Addl.
Collector & ADM, North Goa and nothing adverse
has been reported against him.
He shall draw his salary against the newly
created post vide Order No. 1/5/2017-DHE/1024
dated 07-06-2018.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Avelina D’sa E Pereira, Under Secretary (Higher
Education).
Porvorim, 2nd August, 2023.
Department of Finance
(Budget–I) Division
–––
Notification
No. 1/3/2023-FIN(BUD)/803
The Governor of Goa in consultation with the
Comptroller & Auditor General of India, is pleased to
entrust in public interest, the audit of accounts of
Goa Information Technology Development
Corporation, Panaji, under Section 19(3) of the
Comptroller & Auditor General’s (Duties, Power and
Conditions of Service) Act, 1971, to the Comptroller
& Auditor General of India for a period of 22 (twenty
two) years from 01-04-2006 to 31-03-2028 on the Terms
and Conditions specified in the Annexure appended
hereto.
This supersedes earlier Notification No. 1/3/2023-
-FIN (BUD)/698 dated 21-03-2023.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Pranab G. Bhat, Under Secretary, Finance (Budget-I).
Porvorim, 2nd August, 2023.
–––
ANNEXURE
Terms and Condition
1. The CAG of India may suggest the appointment
of a primary auditor to conduct the audit on his
behalf and on the basis of directions/guidelines
issued by him. Where such an auditor is
appointed, the fees will be payable by the
Institution to that auditor. Where such an
auditor is not appointed, expenditure incurred
by CAG of India in connection with the audit
will be payable to him by the Institution.
456
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
2. In addition to audit to be conducted by the
Primary Auditors, where so appointed, CAG of
India will have the right to conduct test check
of the accounts and to comment on and
supplement the report of the Primary Auditor.
3. The CAG of India or any person appointed by
him in connection with the audit shall have
the same rights, privileges and authority as
the CAG has in connection with the audit of
Government accounts.
4. The result of audit will be communicated by
CAG or any person appointed by him to the
governing body who shall submit a copy of
the report alongwith its observations to the
Government. The CAG will also forward a copy
of the report direct to Government.
5. The audit is entrusted to the CAG in public
interest will be for a period of 5 years accounts
from 01-04-2023 to 31-03-2028 in the first
instance, subject to review of the arrangement
after that period.
6. The scope, extent and manner of conduction
audit shall be as decided by the CAG of India.
7. The CAG will have the right to report to
Parliament/State Legislature the result of audit
at his discretion.
——————
Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
–––
Notification
No. CCT/26-2/2023-24/80/1372
In exercise of the powers conferred by the first
proviso to Section 44 of the Goa Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017 (Goa Act 4 of 2017), the Commissioner,
on the recommendations of the Council, hereby
exempts the registered person whose aggregate
turnover in the financial year 2022-23 is up to two
crore rupees, from filing annual return for the said
financial year.
This Notification shall be deemed to have come
into force with effect from 31st day of July, 2023.
S. S. Gill, IAS, Commissioner of State Tax.
Panaji, 4th August, 2023.
Department of Home
Home—General Division
–––
Order
No. 11/03/19-HD(G)/CFF/2088
Read: (i) Order No. 11/03/19-HD(G)/CFF/66 dated
06-01-2020.
(ii) Order No. 11/03/19-HD(G)/CFF/3176 dated
27-08-2021.
The Government of Goa vide order referred above
constituted a screening committee comprising of
the Officers to sponsor names of the children of
freedom fighters from the list maintained by Home
Department, Government of Goa in the precedence
of seniority by age, suitable to the various posts
under the scheme for providing employment in
Government, to the children of freedom fighters.
In partial modification of the said order, Special
Secretary/Additional Secretary (Home)-Member,
shall be read as Special Secretary/Additional Secretary
(Home)/Joint Secretary (Home)-Member, at Sr. No. (2).
All the other content shall remain unchanged.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Diksha N. Tari, Under Secretary (Home-II).
Porvorim, 3rd August, 2023.
——————
Department of Labour
–––
Order
No. 24/17/2022-LAB/LC/534
Read: Government Order No. 24/17/2022-LAB/LC/
/413 dated 16-08-2022.
Sanction of the Government is hereby accorded
to extend the deputation of Shri Anil Scaria,
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court-I, Panaji, Goa for a further period from 02-09-2023
to 14-03-2024 i.e. the date on which Shri Anil Scaria,
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court-I, Panaji retires on superannuation, on the
same terms and conditions stipulated in the above
referred order.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Vivek Naik, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 4th August, 2023.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
457
Notification
No. 28/02/2023-LAB/533
The following Award passed by the Labour
Court-II, at Panaji-Goa on 12-07-2023 in Case No.
Ref. LC-II/IT/85/07 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.
Vivek Naik, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 1st August, 2023.
———
IN THE LABOUR COURT-II
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(Before Shri Suresh N. Narulkar, Hon’ble
Presiding Officer)
Case. No. Ref. LC-II/IT/85/07
The General Secretary,
All Goa General Employees Union,
2nd floor, Mukund Building,
P. O. Box 90, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa ... Workman/Party-I.
V/s
1. The Managing Director,
M/s. Goa Construction
Housing and Finance
Corporation Limited ..Employer/Party-II (1).
2. Goa Housing Board,
.. Employer/Party-II (2).
Porvorim, Goa
Workmen/Party I represented by Adv. Shri J. Naik.
Employer/Party II represented by Adv. C. Carvalho.
Panaji, dated: 12-07-2023.
AWARD
1. 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, by Order dated 02-11-2006,
bearing No. 28/36/2006-LAB/864 referred the
following dispute for adjudication by the Labour
Court-II of Goa at Panaji-Goa.
“(1)
Whether the action of the management of
M/s. Goa Construction and Housing and
Finance Federation Limited Panaji, in
retrenching the following fourteen Union
with effect from the dates mentioned
against their respective names, is legal and
justified?
Sr.
Name
Date of
No.
Termination
1.
Miss Nutan Govekar
09-10-2002.
2.
Mr. Alirio Mendonca
11-10-2002.
3.
Shri Rama Vishwanath
09-10-2002.
4.
Shri Sadanand N. Shirodkar
09-10-2002.
5.
Mrs. Sunita R. Kalangutkar
09-10-2002.
6.
Shri Kanta Dattaram
09-10-2002.
7.
Mr. Vinod Gurudas Borkar
09-10-2002.
8.
Mr. Godfry Machado
09-10-2002.
9.
Shri Roque Carlos Pereira
09-10-2002.
10.
Mr. Dinesh Chanrakant
09-10-2002.
11.
Shri Yeshwant V. Madkaikar
09-10-2002.
12.
Shri Ajit Salgaonkar
09-10-2002.
13.
Shri Deepak P. Varti
01-03-2004.
(2) If not,
(a) What relief the workpersons are entitled to?
(b) Whether any relief can be granted against
M/s. Goa Housing Board, Porvorim, Goa,
to which assets and liabilities of M/s. Goa
Construction Housing and Finance
Corporation Ltd. have been transferred?
2. On receipt of the reference, a case was
registered under Ref. No. IT/85/2007 and registered
A/D notice was issued to the parties. In pursuance
to the said notice, the Parties put in their appearance.
The Workmen/Party-I filed their Statement of Claim
on 30-05-2008 at Exb. 12, through All Goa General
Employees Union (for short, “the said Union”). “The
facts of the case, in brief as pleaded by the Union are
that all 14 workers involved in the present industrial
dispute are members of and represented by the All
Goa General Employees Union which is a duly
registered Trade Union under the law. The Union
stated that they were the employees of the Employer (1)
in its office establishment as per their respective
dates of employment. The Union stated that 10 of
Workmen were purportedly terminated w.e.f.
09-10-2002 on the alleged ground of intended winding
up of the Employer (1). However there was no such
winding up in fact. The Union stated that two
workers were subsequently terminated on
11-10-2002 and 3 workers were terminated on
01-03-2004. The Union stated that the bare perusal of
the dates of termination itself shows that there was
no winding up in fact. The Union stated that the
Government of Goa which is the sole share holder of
the entire share capital of the Employer (1) only
458
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
purported to transfer all the assets and liabilities of
the Employer (1) to the Employer (2) which is also a
statutory company belonging to the Government of
Goa. The Union stated that all the 14 workers were
therefore entitled to be continued in employment on
the rolls of the Transferee company i.e. Goa Housing
Board i.e. Employer (2), if at all there was such a
transfer in actual fact. The Union stated that the
business activities of the Employer (1) were never
closed. The Union stated that there was no prior
notice of closure. The Union stated that no
information of intended closure was given by the
Employer (1) to the authorities under the I.D. Act, 1947,
nor was any permission sought. The Union stated
that in fact the workers were subsequently given a
written assurance that their services would be
continued. The Union stated that this fact by itself
proves that the Employer (1) is conscious of the
illegality and unjustifiability of its actions. The Union
stated that instead of continuing their services, they
were allegedly retrenched/terminated. The Union
stated that the alleged retrenchment compensation
was, in fact, paid by the Employer (2). The Union
stated that this itself shows that the workers were
actually entitled to be continued on the roll of
Employer (2). The Union stated that this all the more
glaring because the entire assets and liabilities of
the Employer (1), (including all the on going projects
of the Employer (1) were purportedly transferred to
the Employer (2). The Union stated that the
Government of Goa had in fact also taken a separate
decision to continue the workers in employment,
albeit in other Corporations/autonomous bodies. The
Union stated that even after all the alleged
retrenchment of the workers on the alleged ground
of winding up of the Employer (1), the business
activities of the Employer (1) still continued in full
force. The Union stated that after the purported
transfer all the assets and liabilities of the Employer
(1) to the Employer (2), all the schemes and projects
of Employer (1) have been continued by the Employer
(2). The Union stated that the Employer (2) has also
employed new workers on its roll in permanent,
temporary and casual jobs. The Union stated that
however, the Employer (2) has not re-employed the
workers concerned in this dispute, despite the policy
decision of the Government in that respect. The
Union submitted that this is illegal and contrary to
their right to re-employment. The Union stated that
the failure/refusal of the Employer (2) to re-employ
them on the rolls of the Employer (2) is wilful and
deliberate. The Union stated that the Employer (1)
and the Employer (2) both were in possession of
seniority list of the workers concerned in this dispute
and were duty bound to transfer the services of all
the said workers from the rolls of the Employer (1) to
the rolls of the Employer (2), at the time of the
purported transfer of the establishment. The Union
stated that notwithstanding the purported
retrenchment of the workers concerned in this
dispute, they were also entitled to be re-employed
on the rolls of the Employer (2). The Union stated
that they are entitled for a direction from this Hon’ble
Tribunal directing the Employer (2) to re-employ all
the workers concerned in this dispute. The Union
therefore prayed that the workers are all entitled for
being reinstated in service either with Employer (1)
or with its transferee Company viz. Employer (2) with
full back wages, continuity in service and other
consequential benefits.
3. The Employer (1) resisted the claim of the Union
by filing its written statement on 30-05-2008 at Exb. 15.
The Employer (1), as and by way of its reply, submitted
that the present proceedings are not maintainable
as the Union who are agitating before this Hon’ble
Tribunal have been duly retrenched after obtaining
approval of Government on payment of one month
salary and that they have not protested while
relieving them and accepted the retrenchment.
4. The Employer (1) stated that it was a
Government Corporation. The Employer (1) stated that
it was suffering heavy losses and therefore has been
wound up by the government and its assets and
liabilities of payments were transferred to the
Employer (2). The Employer (1) stated that the
liabilities towards any employee of its Corporation
has not been taken over by the Employer (2) and
hence the Union cannot make any claim against the
Employer (2) and Employer (1) Corporation which
does not exist. The Employer (1) stated that it was
established under the Companies Act, 1956 on
30-09-1993 by the Government of Goa with the main
objective to undertake housing, improvement,
building schemes and other allied activities. The
Employer (1) stated that its Board of Directors were
appointed by the Government from time to time. The
Employer (1) stated that after its establishment, it
started incurring continuous losses since 1995-96.
The Employer (1) stated that it was not able to utilize
its assets and fell short in achieving its objectives for
which it was created. The Employer (1) stated that
the funds allotted to them for construction of low
income houses by the planning commission were
utilized for some other purposes like construction of
HIG flats and no initiatives were taken by its officials
and its directors to sell the flat or utilize the land in
their possession to develop and sell. The Employer (1)
stated that there was constant refrain to lack of funds
because of not putting the fixed assets to proper use.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
459
The Employer (1) stated that the Comptroller and
Auditor General of India then recommended the
closure of the Corporation. The Employer (1) stated
that due to the above reasons, the Government of
Goa also therefore took a decision to wind up the
Employer (1) Corporation and transfer the housing
schemes undertaken by them to Employer (2) along
with the Assets and the Liabilities. The Employer (1)
stated that the Government further decided to
retrench the existing staff of the Corporation by
passing the retrenchment benefits under the
provisions of Section 25P of the Industrial Disputes
Act, 1947 i.e. by giving one month notice wage in
lieu of notice and payment of 45 days compensation
(Basic+DA) for every years of continuous service. The
Employer (1) stated that in addition to retrenchment
compensation, the employees got the other benefits
as per their admissibility. The Employer (1) stated
that on 01-03-2004 by deed of transfer, all the assets
and liabilities of the Employer (1) Corporation were
transferred to the Employer (2) without any liability
of the employees. The Employer (1) stated that in deed
of transfer executed between themselves and the
Employer (2) clearly stated that the Employer (2) shall
not be liable for any liabilities towards any claim of
any retrenched employees to absorb in Employer (2).
The Employer (1) stated that thus the retrenched staff
has no right to claim absorption in Employer (2). The
Employer (1) stated that the it has been duly wound
up as per the decision of the Government. The
Employer (1) stated that the termination is done as
per the law and the Union are paid one month salary
and retrenchment benefits and therefore the Union
are not entitled to raise any dispute. The Employer (1)
stated that though Employer (2) is a statutory body
and it has its own strength of employees and rules
and regulations. The Employer (1) stated that there
are no vacancy in Employer (2) and the Union cannot
claim any right to employ them in Employer (2). The
Employer (1) stated that the retrenchment compensation
was paid by them when it was existing. The Employer (1)
stated that the land belonging to them was not at all
developed and activities were not carried out. The
Employer therefore prayed that the reference be
rejected.
4. The Employer (2) also resisted the claim of the
Union by filing its reply dated 30-03-2011 at Exb. 35.
The Employer (2) as and by way of its reply, submitted
that the present proceedings are not maintainable
as the Workmen who are agitating before this Hon’ble
Tribunal have been duly retrenched on payment of
one month’s salary after having obtained the approval
of the Government. The Employer (2) submitted that
the Workmen have not protested whilst being
relieved but have accepted their retrenchment,
hence the present proceedings cannot entertain. The
Employer (2) submitted that the Employer (1) was a
Government owned Corporation which was suffering
heavy losses and has therefore been wound up by
the Government and its assets and liabilities of
payments have been transferred to them. The
Employer (2) submitted that the liabilities towards
any employees of the Employer (1) have not been
taken over by them and hence the Workmen cannot
make any claims either against them or against the
Employer (1) which is no longer in existence. The
Employer (2) therefore submitted that the reference
is liable to be rejected.
5. The Employer (2) stated that the Employer (1)
was established under the Companies Act, 1956 on
30-09-1993 by the Government of Goa with the main
objective of undertaking housing improvement,
building schemes and other allied activities. The
Employer (2) stated that the Board of Directors of the
Employer (1) was appointed by the Government from
time to time. The Employer (1) stated that after the
Employer (1) was established, it began incurring
losses continuously since 1995-96. The Employer (2)
stated that the Employer (1) was not able to utilize
its assets and fell short in achieving its objectives for
which purpose it had been created. The Employer (2)
stated that the funds allotted to the Employer (1) for
construction of low income group houses by the
Planning Commission were utilized for some other
purposes like construction of high income group flats
and no initiatives were taken by the officials of the
Employer (1) and/or the Board of Directors of the
Employer (1) to sell the flats or utilize the land in
their possession to develop and sell the same. The
Employer (2) stated that there was constant refrain
to lack of funds on account of the fixed assets not
being put to proper use. The Employer (2) stated that
the Comptroller and Auditor General of India then
recommended the closure of the Employer (1). The
Employer (2) stated that due to above reasons, the
Government of Goa also therefore took a decision to
wind up the Employer (1) Corporation and transfer
the housing scheme undertaken by the Employer (1)
Corporation to them along with the assets and liabilities.
The Employer (2) stated that the Government further
decided to retrench the existing staff of the Employer
(1) Corporation by paying them the retrenchment
benefits under the provisions of Section 25 P of the
I.D. Act, 1947, i.e. by paying one month’s wages in
lieu of notice and payment of 45 days compensation
(Basic+DA) for every year of continuous service. The
Employer (2) stated that in addition to the
retrenchment compensation, the employees also
received the other benefits as per their admissibility.
The Employer (2) stated that on 01-03-2004, by deed
460
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
of transfer, all the assets and liabilities of the
Employer (1) Corporation were transferred to them
without any liability to the employees. The Employer
(2) stated that in the deed of transfer executed
between the Employer (1) and themselves it has been
clearly stated that the Employer (1) Corporation shall
not be liable for any liabilities towards any claims of
any retrenched employee to be absorbed in
themselves. The Employer (2) stated that thus the
retrenched employees have no right to claim
absorption in themselves. The Employer (2) stated
that once the retrenchment has been undertaken by
the Government of Goa, the retrenched Workmen are
not entitled to reinstatement. The Employer (2)
submitted that the Employer (1) has been duly wound
up as per the decision of the Government. The
Employer (2) submitted that the termination has been
done as per the law and the Workmen have been
paid one month’s salary as well as retrenchment
benefits. The Employer (2) submitted that the
Workmen are therefore are not entitled to raise any
dispute now. The Employer (2) submitted that the
Employer (2) is a statutory body and has own strength
of employees as well as its own rules and regulations.
The Employer (2) submitted that there are no
vacancies in their board and the Workmen cannot
claim any right to be employed in the Employer (2)
therefore prayed that the reference be liable to be
rejected.
6. Thereafter, the Union filed their Rejoinder to
the Written Statement of the Employer (1) on
11-08-2008 at Exb. 21. The Union, as and by way of its
Rejoinder, submitted that the Written Statement
dated 30-05-2008 is illegal and unauthorized being
filed by person/organization which is not a Party to
the dispute and hence the said written statement
may kindly be struck off the record and the matter be
proceeded ex-parte against the Employer (1). The
Union denied the overall case as pleaded in the
written statement of the Employer (1). The Union
submitted that the alleged deed of transfer dated
01-03-2004 or its alleged contents are not admitted.
7. The Union also filed their Rejoinder on 05-05-2011
at Exb. 36, to the Written Statement of the Employer (2).
The Union, as and by way of its Rejoinder, submitted
that maintains, reiterates, repeats and confirm all the
averments made in their Statement of Claim and
anything contrary thereto or in consistent therewith
which may be contained in the Written Statement.
The Union stated that any such alleged agreement
or understanding between the Employer (1)
Corporation and the Employer (2) is contrary to law,
illegal, unjustified and in any case not binding on
the Workmen or on the Union.
8. Based on the pleadings filed by the parties
herein above, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to
frame the following issues:
1) Whether the Party-I/Workmen proves that the
action of the Party-II/Employer in retrenching
the 14 Union in the order of reference illegal
and unjustified?
2) Whether the Party-I/Workmen proves that the
Employer is an existing legal entity?
3) Whether the Party-II proves that the present
order of reference is not maintainable as
alleged in para 1 of their reply?
3A) Whether Employer (2) proves that Employer
(1) has been wound up and the agreement of
transfer executed states that there is no
liability on Employer (2) to accommodate any
of the employees of Employer (1)?
4) Whether the Party-I is entitled to any relief?
5) What Award?
9. My answers to the aforesaid issues are as under:
1) Issue No. 1
:
In the negative.
2) Issue No. 2
:
In the negative.
3) Issue No. 3
:
In the affirmative.
4) Issue No. 3A
:
In the affirmative.
5) Issue No. 4 & 5
:
As per final order.
REASONS
10. Issue No. 1 & 3:
I am deciding the Issue No. 1 & 3 simultaneously
as both the said issues are co-related to each other.
Both the Employer, in its reply filed in the present
proceeding, submitted that as the Workmen have
been duly retrenched after obtaining approval of
Government on payment of one month salary. Burden
was cast on the Party-I Union to prove the Issue No. 1.
11. The term “retrenchment” has been defined
u/s 2 (OO) of the I.D. Act, 1947. Section 25 (FFF)
provides for compensation to the Workmen in case of
closing down of undertaking and it reads as under:
Section 25FFF—Compensation to the Union in
case of closing down of undertakings—
(1) Where an undertaking is closed down for any
reason whatsoever, every Workmen who has
been in continuous service for not less than
one year in that undertaking immediately
before such closure shall, subject to the
provisions of sub-section (2), be entitled to
notice and compensation in accordance with
the provisions of Section 25-F, as if the
Workmen had been retrenched.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
461
Provided that where the undertaking is closed
down on account of unavoidable circumstances
beyond the control of the Employer, the compensation
to be paid to the Workmen under Clause (b) of Section
25F, shall not exceed his average pay for three months.
12. Similarly Section 25F of the I.D. Act provides
for condition precedent for a valid retrenchment of
the Workmen and it reads as under:
Section 25F— No Workmen employed in any
industry who has been in continuous service for not
less than one year under an Employer shall be
retrenched by that Employer until—
(a) The Workmen has been given one month’s
notice in writing indicating the reasons for
retrenchment and the period of notice has
expired, or the Workmen has been paid in
lieu of such notice, wages for the period of
the notice.
(b) The Workmen has been paid, at the time of
retrenchment, compensation which shall be
equivalent to fifteen days average pay (for
every completed year of continuous service)
or any part thereof in excess of six months
and
(c) Notice in the prescribed manner is served
on the appropriate Government (or such
authority as may be specified by the
appropriate Government by notification in
the Official Gazette).
13. Thus, Section 25 F of the I.D. Act, is mandatory
for the retrenchment of any of the Workmen. In the
present matter the burden was put on the Union to
prove that the retrenchment of all 14 Workmen named
in the order of reference is illegal and unjustified.
The Workmen however failed to prove the present
issue. Neither the Workmen/Union pleaded nor
supported by any material evidence that they have
not been paid the retrenchment compensation as
well as one month notice or one month pay in lieu of
notice. The Workmen/Union failed to state the
reasons for invalidity of their retrenchment. The
evidence on record indicates that all the retrenched
Workmen were duly paid retrenchment benefits in
terms of Section 25 F of the I.D. Act, 1947 by Employer
(1). The evidence on record indicates that the financial
books of the Corporation for the last 5 years have
consistently shown losses and therefore the
Government of Goa compelled to wind up the
Corporation. It is therefore held that the Workmen
failed to prove that the action of the Employer (1) in
retrenching its 14 Workmen named in the order of
reference is illegal and unjustified. It is further held
that the order of reference is not maintainable in view
of the reasons stated in para 1 of the reply. The Issue
No. 1 is answered in the negative and the issue No. 3
is answered in the affirmative.
14. Issue No. 2:
The burden was put on the Workmen/Union to
prove that the Employer is an existing legal entity.
The Workmen/Union has however failed to prove that
the Employer is an existing body. The evidence on
record indicates that the Employer Corporation has
been wound up pursuant to the order/decision of
the Government of Goa as the Corporation was facing
heavy losses. It is therefore held that the Workmen
failed to prove that the Employer Corporation is an
existing legal entity. Issue No. 2 is therefore answered
in the negative.
15. Issue No. 3 (A):
It is admitted that the order dated 06-04-2002
wherein the decision of winding up of the Employer/
/Corporation was conveyed to its Managing Director.
The sole witness of the Workmen, Shri Deepak Varty
acknowledge and admits of being aware of the deed
of transfer was executed with due approval of the
Government of Goa. The said witness of the Workmen
admitted that the Government has given permission
for winding up of the Goa Construction Housing and
Finance Corporation. In terms of Clause 5 of deed of
transfer, it is stated that the service of 14 employees
have been retrenched by paying compensation and
Employer (2) shall not be liable for any liability
towards any claim of any employees to absorb this
employees in Goa Housing Board. The sole witness
of the Workmen admitted that the aforesaid Clause 5
of the deed of transfer has not been challenged and
as such deed of transfer has attained finality. Hence
it is held that the Employer (2) proved that the
Employer (1) has been wound up and the agreement
of transfer executed states that there is no liability
on the Employer (2) to accommodate any of the
employees of the Employer (1). The issue No. 3 is
therefore answered in the affirmative.
16. Issue No. 4:
While deciding the issue No. 1, I have discussed
and held that the Workmen failed to prove that the
action of the Employer in retrenching its 14 Workmen
named in the order of reference is illegal and
unjustified. The Workmen are not entitled to any
relief, the issue No. 4 is therefore answered in the
negative.
462
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
In view of above I pass the following order.
O R D E R
1. It is held that the action of the management
of M/s. Goa Construction Housing and
Finance Corporation Ltd., Panaji-Goa, in
retrenching
the
fourteen
Workmen
represented by the Party-I Union with effect
from the dates mentioned against their
respective names, is legal and justified.
2. It is held that all the 14 Workpersons are not
entitled to any relief.
3. It is further held that no relief can be granted
against M/s. Goa Housing Board, Porvorim-Goa
to which assets and liabilities of M/s. Goa
Construction and Housing and Finance
Corporation Ltd. have been transferred.
Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Suresh N. Narulkar),
Presiding Officer,
Labour Court-II.
————
Notification
No. 28/02/2023-LAB/Part-I/535
The following Award passed by the Industrial
Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on
25-07-2023 in Ref. No. IT/14/2021 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.
Vivek Naik, Under Secretary (Labour).
Porvorim, 4th August, 2023.
———
IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
AND LABOUR COURT
GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(Before Mr. Anil Scaria, Hon’ble Presiding Officer)
Ref. No. IT/14/2021
Workman Shri Yogesh Soundalkar,
Rep. by Goa Union of Industrial Workers,
S-I, 2nd floor, Anirudha Plaza,
Shantinagar, Ponda-Goa .... Workman/Party-I.
V/s
The Managing Director,
M/s. Muktar Automobiles Pvt. Ltd.,
Plot No. L-128, Phase III-B,
Verna Industrial Estate,
Verna-Goa
.... Employer/Party-II
Workmen/Party I represented by Learned Advocate
Shri Hrudaynath Shirodkar.
Employer/Party II represented by None, prodeeding
Ex-parte.
AWARD
(Delivered on this the 25th day of the month of
July of the year 2023)
By Order dated 25-06-2021, bearing No. 28/10/
/2021-LAB/297, the Government of Goa in exercise
of powers conferred by Section 10(1)(d) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, has referred the
following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-
“(1) Whether non-employment of Shri Yogesh
Soundalkar, Technician, with effect from
22-06-2020 in the organization of M/s. Muktar
Automobiles Private Limited, Plot No. I-128,
Phase III-B, Verna Industrial Estate, Verna-Goa,
amounts to refusal of employment or
voluntary resignation?
(2) Based upon the findings on issue No. (1)
above, what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2. Notices were issued to the Parties. The Party I
appeared and filed its Statement of Claim. Party II
failed to appear and has been placed ex-parte.
3. The case of the Party I is that Party II appointed
the workman (Yogesh Soundalkar) as a Technician
on 12-09-2013. That, thereafter, there was no raise in
wages. That there were security issues and lack of
facilities like leave and proper working hours. That
there was also non-payment of bonus. That by letter
dated 05-03-2020, the Workman asked Party II to
relieve him from service. That, Party II did not relieve
the Workman from service. That Party II asked the
Workman to continue his services. That Party II told
the Workman that he would be paid enhanced
wages and other allowances. That the Workman
decided to continue his service with Party II. That
the Workman was not aware that he was required
to withdraw his resignation letter. That in the
meantime, the Government of India declared a lock-
down to contain the spread of Corona cases. That
eventually due to relaxation in restrictions, Party II
called the Workman for duty w.e.f. 08-06-2020. That
the Workman joined duty on 08-06-2020. That the
Workman worked in the Body Shop Department from
08-06-2020 to 20-06-2020 on enhanced wages and
allowances.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
463
4. That on 07-06-2020 the workers of Party II held
a meeting and decided to form a Union. That Shri
Yogesh Soundalkar (Workman) was made the
President of the local committee of the Union. That
Party II was informed about the unionization by
letter dated 12-06-2020. That Party II started
harassing the members of the Union. That Party II
started pressurizing the members to resign from the
Union. That some of the members resigned from the
Union. That on 20-06-2020 Mr. Suraj Borkar (HR),
Mr. Balkrishna Kamat (GM) and Mr. Vijay Dhuri
(Manager) called the Workman to their cabin and
told him that he would be relieved from service if
he does not resign from the Union. That the
Workman refused to do so. That the Workman was
therefore refused employment w.e.f. 22-06-2020. That
the Workman was not given any letter stating that
his resignation has been accepted or that his
services were terminated.
5. That by letter dated 24-06-2020, the Workman
asked Party II to allow him to join duty. That Party II
neither allowed the Workman to join his duties nor
did it reply to the letter. That Party II did not follow
the principles of natural justice and give the
Workman an opportunity to be heard.
6. That the Union (Party I) sought the intervention
of the Dy. Labour Commissioner, Government of Goa,
Margao, Salcete-Goa. That the conciliation
proceedings started. That, for the first time, Party II
informed the Conciliation Officer that the
Resignation Letter of the Workman was accepted
w.e.f. 04-04-2020. That thereafter, Party II did not
appear for any discussion before the Conciliation
Officer and the conciliation ended in failure.
Therefore, it is prayed that an Award be passed
directing Party II to reinstate the Workman with full
back wages and other consequential benefits.
7. As seen above, Party II has not appeared or
filed its Written Statement. Party II has been placed
ex-parte.
8. The Learned Advocate for Party I has filed his
written arguments.
9. The following points arises for my determination
and my findings thereon are as follows:-
Sr.
Point of
Finding
No.
determination
(i) Does Party I prove that
In the affirmative.
the non-employment of
Yogesh Soundalkar amounts
to refusal of employment?
(ii) Has Yogesh Soundalkar
In the negative.
voluntarily resigned
from services?
REASONS
10. Point No. (i) and (ii):- Party I states that Party II
refused employment to Yogesh Soundalkar. The
Order of Reference also mandates this Court to
ascertain, if Yogesh Soundalkar has voluntarily
resigned from service.
11. Party I has examined Shri Yogesh Soundalkar
as Witness No. 1 for Party I. He is the Workman who
has been allegedly refused employment.
12. Witness No. 1 for Party I deposes that Party II
appointed him as a Technician on 12-09-2013. He
deposes that, thereafter, there was no rise in wages.
He deposes that there were security issues and lack
of facilities like leave and proper working hours. He
deposes that there was also non-payment of bonus.
He deposes that by letter dated 05-03-2020 he asked
Party II to relieve him from service. He deposes that
Party II did not relieve him from service and asked
him to continue his service with Party II. He deposes
that Party II told him that he would be paid
enhanced wages and other allowances. He deposes
that he decided to continue his service with Party II.
He deposes that he did not know that he had to
withdraw his resignation letter. In the meanwhile,
the Government of India decided to declare a
lock-down to contain the spread of Corona cases.
He deposes that eventually due to relaxation in
restrictions, Party II called him for duty w.e.f.
08-06-2020. He deposes that from 08-06-2020 to
20-06-2020 he worked in the Body Shop Department
on enhanced wages. He deposes that on 07-06-2020,
the workers of Party II held a meeting and decided
to form a Union. He deposes that Party II was
informed about the formation of the Union by letter
dated 12-06-2020. He deposes that he was made the
President of the Local Committee of the Union. He
deposes that Party II started harassing the members
of the Union. He deposes that Party II started
pressurizing the members to resign from the Union.
He deposes that on 20-06-2020, Mr. Suraj Borkar (HR),
Mr. Balkrishna Kamat (GM) and Mr. Vijay Dhuri
(Manager) called him to the chamber and told him
that he would be relieved from his service if he does
not resign from the Union. He deposes that he
refused to do so. He deposes that he was, therefore,
refused employment w.e.f. 22-06-2020. He deposes
that he was not given any letter stating that his
resignation has been accepted or that his services
were terminated. He deposes that by letter dated
24-06-2020 he asked Party II to allow him to join
duties. He deposes that Party II neither allowed him
464
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
to join duties nor did it reply to the said letter. He
deposes that Party II did not follow the principles of
natural justice and give him an opportunity to be
heard. He deposes that the Union (Party I) sought
the
intervention
of
the
Deputy
Labour
Commissioner, Margao. He deposes that conciliation
proceedings started. He deposes that for the first
time Party II informed the Conciliation Officer that
his resignation was accepted w.e.f. 04-04-2020. He
deposes that this is not true as he was asked to
report for work from 08-06-2020.
13. Copy of Report of Failure of conciliation
proceedings is at Exhibit 11. Copy of minutes of
conciliation proceedings is at Exhibit 12. Copy of
letter dated 05-03-2020 sent by the Workman to
Manager of Party II is at Exhibit 16. Copy of letter
dated 24-06-2020 to the Managing Director of Party II
by the Workman is at Exhibit 17. Copy of letter
dated 13-07-2020 by the President of the Goa Union
of Industrial Workers to the Managing Director of
Party II is at Exhibit 18.
14. The evidence adduced by Party I has gone
unchallenged. Therefore, Party I has proved its case.
Party I has proved that non-employment of Yogesh
Soundalkar amounts to refusal of employment. Party II
has not adduced evidence to show that the
workman has voluntarily resigned from service,
Therefore, Yogesh Soundalkar has not voluntarily
resigned from service. Hence, I hold point of
determination No. 1 in the affirmative and point of
determinatron No. 2 in the negative.
15. The Workman has neither pleaded or adduced
evidence to show that he was unemployed since
the date of refusal of employment. Hence, he is not
entitled to back wages. He is only entitled to
reinstatement with continuity in service.
Hence, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) Party II is directed to reinstate the
Workman namely Shri Yogesh Soundalkar
with continuity of service.
(ii) No order as to cost.
(iii) Inform the Government accordingly.
Sd/-
(Anil Scaria)
Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal
Labour Court.
Department of Mines
Directorate of Mines & Geology
–––
Order
No. 01/42/2020/DPC-Guidelines/ADM/Mines/1657
Read: 1. Office Memorandum No. 2/7/2017-PER/
/3701 dated 07-12-2017.
2. Office Memorandum No. 2/7/2017-PER/
/746 dated 12-03-2018.
3. Order No. 2/7/76-PER(Vol-III)(Part)/3015
dated 24-11-2021.
In pursuance to the Office Memorandum read at
preamble (1), (2) and (3) above, the Departmental
Selection Committee and Departmental Promotion
Committee in respect of Group ‘C’ posts under
Directorate of Mines & Geology is hereby
reconstituted as under:
1) Director of Mines & Geology
— Chairman.
2) Dy. Director of Mines-I
— Member.
3) Head of Office
— Member.
This supersedes earlier Order No. 01/04/2008/
/ADM/MINES/VOL-III/1819 dated 10-12-2020.
Dr. S. Shanbhogue, Director (Mines & Geology)/
Head of Department.
Panaji, 7th August, 2023.
——————
Department of Personnel
–––
Order
No. 7/3/2023-PER/3247
Read:
Order dated 31-10-2013 of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in Writ Petition (Civil)
No. 82 of 2011 (under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India) between T.S.R.
Subramanian & others and Union of India &
others.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide Order
dated 31-10-2013 in the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 82
of 2011 (under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)
filed by Thiru T.S.R. Subramanian & others Vs. Union
of India & others has directed inter-alia, to
constitute Civil Services Board in Centre, States and
the Union Territories with high ranking serving
Officers, who are specialists in their respective
fields, within a period of three months, till the
Parliament brings in a proper legislation in setting
up Civil Services Board, in order to ensure
transparency in Administration.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
465
2. In pursuance of the said directions of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India read with Office
Memorandum No. F. No. 14040/22/2013-UTS-I dated
31-12-2013 of the Government of India, Ministry of
Home Affairs, New Delhi, the Governor of Goa is
pleased to constitute the Civil Services Board in
respect of the IAS Officers with immediate effect, in
the following manner:-
I. Constitution of Civil Services Board, Goa for
IAS Officers
(i) The composition of Civil Services Board, Goa
shall be as follows:-
1. Chief Secretary
—
Chairman.
2. Senior most Principal
—
Member.
Secretary to Government
3. Secretary/Special
—
Member
Secretary (Personnel)
Secretary.
(ii) Functions:-
The Civil Services Board shall make
recommendations to the Government on the
following service matters:-
(a) Posting/allocation of subject in respect of
IAS Officers posted in this Segment.
(b) Transfers and postings of IAS Officers
posted in this Segment.
(c) While making recommendations, the
requirement of a minimum tenure of
service as prescribed by the Government
shall be kept in view by the Board.
(d) The Civil Services Board may consider
transfer of Officers before the tenure fixed
by the Government based on the necessity
and circumstances, which the Civil
Services Board shall satisfy itself.
(e) The Civil Services Board may recommend
the names of Officers to the Competent
Authority for transfer before completion
of minimum tenure with reasons to be
recorded in writing.
(iii) Procedure:-
(a) The proposals for transfer and postings
of IAS Officers shall be referred to the
Board by the Personnel Department.
(b) The Civil Services Board shall:-
(i)
Consider the report of Department
along with any other inputs it may
have from other reliable sources.
(ii) The Board may have the option to
obtain the comments or views of the
Officer proposed to be transferred
regarding the circumstances presented
to it in justification of the proposal.
(iii) The Board shall satisfy itself
regarding the inevitability of the
premature transfer before making a
recommendation to the Government
based on clear findings.
(c) The Competent Authority may over-rule the
recommendations of the Civil Services
Board, by recording reasons in writing.
(iv) Tenure of posting:-
There shall be a minimum tenure of two
years for IAS Officers in the allotted posting.
However, in the event of any pre matured
transfer due to unavoidable administrative
reasons or health grounds, such proposal
shall be referred to the Civil Service Board
and a reasoned decision would be arrived
at.
This supersedes all orders/notifications issued in
this regard in the past.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Eshant V. Sawant, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).
Porvorim, 31st July, 2023.
————
Order
No. 22/10/2018-PER/3248
Read: (1) Order No. 14020/01/2023-UTS.I dated
08-06-2023, Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi.
In pursuance to the Order No. 14020/01/2023-
-UTS.I dated 08-06-2023 of the Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, the Governor
of Goa is pleased to post Shri Akshat Kaushal, IPS
(2018) as Superintendent of Police (ANC). He shall
also hold the charge of Superintendent of Police
(Cyber Crime); Commandant 1st, 2nd and 3rd IRBn
and PRO with effect from 01-08-2023 (b.n.) in
addition to his own duty.
Shri Akshat Kaushal, IPS (2018) has joined the
Goa Administration on 14-07-2023 (f.n.).
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Nathine S. Araujo, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).
Porvorim, 1st August, 2023.
466
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
Department of Planning
Directorate of Planning, Statistics & Evaluation
and Office of the Chief Registrar of Births and
Deaths
–––
Notification
No. DPSE/RBD/CRS-Notification/2017/1077
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
section (2) of Section 4 of the Registration of Births
and Deaths Act, 1969 (Central Act No. 18 of 1969),
the Government of Goa is hereby pleased to appoint
Shri Noel Fernandes, Statistical Officer of
Directorate of Planning, Statistics and Evaluation,
Government of Goa as the “Additional Chief
Registrar of Births and Deaths”.
Shri Noel Fernandes will hold the additional
charge of the post of Additional Chief Registrar of
Births and Deaths in addition to his own duties
with immediate effect.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Vijay B. Saxena, Director/Chief Registrar of Births
and Deaths.
Porvorim, 2nd August, 2023.
——————
Department of Public Health
–––
Order
No. 44/21/2017-I/PHD/Part-II/1105
On the recommendation of Goa Public Service
Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/
/12/24(1)/19/176 dated 11-07-2023, the Government
is pleased to declare the following Doctors under
Directorate of Health Services as having satisfactorily
completed their probation period with effect from
the date indicated against their names and to
confirm them in the post of Medical Officer with
effect from the date of their completion of probation
period/date of their completion of extended
probation period:-
Sr.
Name of officer
Date of
No.
completion of
probation period
1.
Dr. Suvidha Subash
20-09-2018.
Khandolkar
Sr.
Name of Officer
Date of
No.
completion of
extended
probation period
1. Dr. Pranita Yadnesh Satardekar
18-09-2019.
alias Pranita Upendra Gaonkar
2. Dr. Shital Rama Gaude
11-09-2019.
3. Dr. Kreda Fernandes
09-05-2019.
4. Dr. Vijaya Durgesh Naik
17-09-2019.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).
Porvorim, 31st July, 2023.
————
Order
No. 5/23/2022-IV/PHD/1180
Sanction of the Government is hereby accorded
to create One Supernumerary post of Professor in
the Department of Public Health Dentistry in Goa
Dental College & Hospital, Bambolim in Pay Matrix
Level-13 (1,23,100-2,15,900) + Non-Practicing
allowance as admissible (pre-revised Pay Band-4 of
Rs. 37,400-67,000 + GP Rs. 8,700/-) for a period of
5 years or till Dr. Ridhima Gaunkar is absorbed in
the regular post of Professor, whichever is earlier.
This issues of with the approval of Administrative
Reforms Department vide U. O. No. 533/F dated
06-03-2023, Department of Personnel vide U. O. No.
1514/F dated 10-06-2023 and with the concurrence
of Finance (R&C) Department vide U. O. No.
1400092189/F dated 28-06-2023.
This also issues with the approval of the Council
of Ministers in the XXVIIIth meeting held on
01-08-2023 as conveyed vide letter No. 1/17/2023-
-GAD-II dated 02-08-2023.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Trupti B. Manerkar, Union Secretary (Health-I).
Porvorim, 2nd August, 2023.
——————
Department of Revenue
–––
Order
No. 35/2/2013-RD/933
In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (b)
of sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the Indian Stamp
Act, 1899 (Act No. 2 of 1899), as in force in the State
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
467
of Goa, the Government of Goa hereby permits the
Life Insurance Corporation of India, Goa Divisional
Office, Panaji (hereinafter referred to as the “LIC
Goa”) to pay consolidated stamp duty of
Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakhs only),
chargeable on sums to be insured in the insurance
policies issued by its offices in the State of Goa
with effect from 1st January, 2023 upto
31st December, 2023 in lieu of affixing stamps upon
individual insurance policies, which has been paid
vide cheque No. 000336 dated 13-07-2023, drawn
on HDFC Bank, Panaji, Goa, subject to the following
conditions, namely:-
(a) In case the stamp duty chargeable on the
insurance policies issued during the above
mentioned period falls short of the stamp duty
consolidated herein and paid to the
Government, the excess consolidated stamp
duty shall be adjusted for the next calendar
year 2024.
(b) In case the stamp duty chargeable on the
insurance policies issued during the above
period exceeds the stamp duty consolidated
herein and paid to the Government, the
balance amount due towards the stamp duty
shall be paid to the Government Treasury by
the LIC Goa latest by the first week of January,
2024.
(c) A detailed report of the total stamp duty
charged on the sum insured in the insurance
policies issued by the offices of the LIC Goa in
the State of Goa during the above period shall
be submitted to the Secretary (Revenue),
Revenue Department, Government of Goa on
or before 31-12-2023.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Durga Kinlekar, Under Secretary (Revenue-I).
Porvorim, 4th August, 2023.
——————
Department of Social Welfare
Directorate of Social Welfare
–––
Corrigendum
No. 61-156-2022-23-BC/DSW/2914
In partial modification vide Notification No. 61-156-2022-23-DSW/6660 dated 10-03-2023, the following
name of the newly appointed Board of Director on Board appearing in the above Notification shall be
corrected and read as below.
Sr. No.
As per Notification
Sr. No. as per Notification
Name to be corrected
1
2
3
4
01.
Shri Siddesh Pednekar
Sr. No. 3
Shri Siddhesh B. Pednekar.
02.
Shri Yeshwant B. Kanolkar
Sr. No. 5
Shri Yeshwant B. Candolkar.
03.
Shri Avadhoot Naik
Sr. No. 6
Shri Audut P. Naik.
04.
Shri Suryakant Anand Naik
Sr. No. 7
Shri Surya Anand Naik.
The other contents of the Order remain unchanged.
Ajit Panchwadkar, Director & ex officio Add. Secretary (Social Welfare).
Panaji, 1st August, 2023.
————
Corrigendum
No. 61-156-2022-23-BC/DSW/2915
In partial modification vide Notification No.
61-156-2022-23-DSW/6660 dated 10-03-2023, the
name on the Board of Director viz. ‘Shri Shubham
Chodankar’ appearing at Sr. No. 8 in the Notification
cited above shall be replaced and read as ‘Shri
Ashok Gangaram Palekar’.
The other contents of the Order remain
unchanged.
Ajit Panchwadkar, Director & ex officio Add.
Secretary (Social Welfare).
Panaji, 1st August, 2023.
468
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
Department of Town and Country Planning
–––
Notification
No. 36/18/83/17(2)/Siolim/271/28/TCP-2023/183
Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an
application dated 24-04-2023 (hereinafter referred
to as the “said Application”) under sub-section (2)
of Section 17 of the Goa Town and Country Planning
Act, 1974 (Act 21 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Act”) for correction of inconsistent/
/incoherent zoning provisions in the Regional Plan
for Goa-2021 (RPG-2021) in respect of plot of land
admeasuring an area of 1775 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 271, sub-division No. 28, of Village Siolim,
Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa
(hereinafter referred to as the “said plot of land”);
And whereas, the correction/rectification as
requested by the applicant has been scrutinized
and a Report of the Department alongwith the report
from a registered professional was submitted to
the Government for decision (hereinafter referred
to as the “said Reports”);
And whereas, the Government has considered
the said Reports and it is of the opinion that
alteration/modification is necessary to be carried
out to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of rectifying
inconsistent/incoherent zoning that has occurred
in the RPG-2021 and it has directed the Chief Town
Planner (Planning) to carry out alteration/
/modification to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of
correcting/rectifying the zone of part of plot of land
surveyed under Survey No. 271, sub-division No.
28, of Village Siolim, Bardez Taluka admeasuring an
area of 380 m2 only which is earmarked as Natural
Cover with No Development Slope with Irrigation
Command Area as per RPG-2021, to Settlement
Zone by issuing Notification under sub-section (2)
of Section 17 of the said Act;
Now, therefore, as directed by the Government
and in pursuance of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 (Act 21
of 1975), the following alteration/modification to
the RPG-2021 is hereby carried out, namely:-
In the RPG-2021, the zone of part of the plot of
land admeasuring an area of 380 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 271, sub-division No. 28, of Village
Siolim, Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of
Goa which is earmarked as Natural Cover with No
Development Slope with Irrigation Command Area
as per RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Planning).
Panaji, 8th August, 2023.
Notification
No. 36/18/84/17(2)/Siolim/271/30/TCP-2023/184
Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an
application dated 24-04-2023 (hereinafter referred
to as the “said Application”) under sub-section (2)
of Section 17 of the Goa Town and Country Planning
Act, 1974 (Act 21 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Act”) for correction of inconsistent/
/incoherent zoning provisions in the Regional Plan
for Goa-2021 (RPG-2021) in respect of plot of land
admeasuring an area of 1375 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 271, sub-division No. 30, of Village Siolim,
Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa
(hereinafter referred to as the “said plot of land”);
And whereas, the correction/rectification as
requested by the applicant has been scrutinized
and a Report of the Department alongwith the report
from a registered professional was submitted to the
Government for decision (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Reports”);
And whereas, the Government has considered
the said Reports and it is of the opinion that
alteration/modification is necessary to be carried
out to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of rectifying
inconsistent/incoherent zoning that has occurred
in the RPG-2021 and it has directed the Chief Town
Planner (Planning) to carry out alteration/
/modification to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of
correcting/rectifying the zone of part of plot of land
surveyed under Survey No. 271, sub-division No. 30,
of Village Siolim, Bardez Taluka admeasuring an
area of 108 m2 only which is earmarked as Natural
Cover with No Development Slope with Irrigation
Command Area as per RPG-2021, to Settlement Zone
by issuing Notification under sub-section (2) of
Section 17 of the said Act;
Now, therefore, as directed by the Government
and in pursuance of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 (Act 21
of 1975), the following alteration/modification to
the RPG-2021 is hereby carried out, namely:-
In the RPG-2021, the zone of part of the plot of
land admeasuring an area of 108 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 271, sub-division No. 30, of Village Siolim,
Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa
which is earmarked as Natural Cover with No
Development Slope with Irrigation Command Area
as per RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Planning).
Panaji, 8th August, 2023.
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
469
Notification
No. 36/18/54/17(2)/Nuvem/220/10/TCP-2023/185
Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an
application dated 08-05-2023 (hereinafter referred
to as the “said Application”) under sub-section (2)
of Section 17 of the Goa Town and Country Planning
Act, 1974 (Act 21 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Act”) for correction of inconsistent/
/incoherent zoning provisions in the Regional Plan
for Goa-2021 (RPG-2021) in respect of plot of land
admeasuring an area of 4010 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 220, sub-division No. 10, of Village
Nuvem, Salcete Taluka, District South Goa, State of
Goa (hereinafter referred to as the “said plot of
land”);
And whereas, the correction/rectification as
requested by the applicant has been scrutinized
and a Report of the Department alongwith the report
from a registered professional was submitted to the
Government for decision (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Reports”);
And whereas, the Government has considered
the said Reports and it is of the opinion that
alteration/modification is necessary to be carried
out to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of rectifying
inadvertent/inconsistent/incoherent error zoning
that has occurred in the RPG-2021 and it has
directed the Chief Town Planner (Planning) to carry
out alteration/modification to the RPG-2021 for the
purpose of correcting/rectifying the zone of part of
plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 220, sub-
-division No. 10, of Village Nuvem, Salcete Taluka
admeasuring an area of 479 m2 only which is
earmarked as Paddy Field with Irrigation Command
Area as per RPG-2021, to Settlement Zone by issuing
Notification under sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the said Act;
Now, therefore, as directed by the Government
and in pursuance of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 (Act 21
of 1975), the following alteration/modification to
the RPG-2021 is hereby carried out, namely:-
In the RPG-2021, the zone of part of the plot of
land admeasuring an area of 479 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 220, sub-division No. 10, of Village
Nuvem, Salcete Taluka, District South Goa, State of
Goa which is earmarked as Paddy Field with
Irrigation Command Area as per RPG-2021 is hereby
corrected as Settlement Zone.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Planning).
Panaji, 8th August, 2023.
Notification
No. 36/18/53/17(2)/Nuvem/220/9/TCP-2023/186
Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an
application dated 08-05-2023 (hereinafter referred
to as the “said Application”) under sub-section (2)
of Section 17 of the Goa Town and Country Planning
Act, 1974 (Act 21 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Act”) for correction of inconsistent/
/incoherent zoning provisions in the Regional Plan
for Goa-2021 (RPG-2021) in respect of plot of land
admeasuring an area of 7575 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 220, sub-division No. 9, of Village Nuvem,
Salcete Taluka, District South Goa, State of Goa
(hereinafter referred to as the “said plot of land”);
And whereas, the correction/rectification as
requested by the applicant has been scrutinized
and a Report of the Department alongwith the report
from a registered professional was submitted to the
Government for decision (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Reports”);
And whereas, the Government has considered
the said Reports and it is of the opinion that
alteration/modification is necessary to be carried
out to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of rectifying
inadvertent/inconsistent/incoherent error zoning
that has occurred in the RPG-2021 and it has
directed the Chief Town Planner (Planning) to carry
out alteration/modification to the RPG-2021 for the
purpose of correcting/rectifying the zone of part of
plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 220, sub-
-division No. 9, of Village Nuvem, Salcete Taluka
admeasuring an area of 1215 m2 only which is
earmarked as Paddy Field with Irrigation Command
Area as per RPG-2021, to Settlement Zone by issuing
Notification under sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the said Act;
Now, therefore, as directed by the Government
and in pursuance of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 (Act 21
of 1975), the following alteration/modification to
the RPG-2021 is hereby carried out, namely:-
In the RPG-2021, the zone of part of the plot of
land admeasuring an area of 1215 m2, surveyed
under Survey No. 220, sub-division No. 9, of Village
Nuvem, Salcete Taluka, District South Goa, State of
Goa which is earmarked as Paddy Field with
Irrigation Command Area as per RPG-2021 is hereby
corrected as Settlement Zone.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Planning).
Panaji, 8th August, 2023.
470
OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA
SERIES II No. 19
10TH AUGUST, 2023
Notification
No. 36/18/85/17(2)/Loliem/289/1-M/TCP-2023/187
Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an
application dated 05-05-2023 (hereinafter referred
to as the “said Application”) under sub-section (2)
of Section 17 of the Goa Town and Country Planning
Act, 1974 (Act 21 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Act”) for correction of inconsistent/
/incoherent zoning provisions in the Regional Plan
for Goa-2021 (RPG-2021) in respect of plot of land
admeasuring an area of 300 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 289, sub-division No. 1-M, of Village
Loliem, Canacona Taluka, District South Goa, State
of Goa (hereinafter referred to as the “said plot of
land”);
And whereas, the correction/rectification as
requested by the applicant has been scrutinized
and a Report of the Department alongwith the report
from a registered professional was submitted to the
Government for decision (hereinafter referred to as
the “said Reports”);
And whereas, the Government has considered
the said Reports and it is of the opinion that
alteration/modification is necessary to be carried
out to the RPG-2021 for the purpose of rectifying
inadvertent/inconsistent/incoherent error zoning
that has occurred in the RPG-2021 and it has
directed the Chief Town Planner (Planning) to carry
out alteration/modification to the RPG-2021 for the
purpose of correcting/rectifying the zone of part of
plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 289, sub-
-division No. 1-M of Village Loliem, Canacona Taluka
admeasuring an area of 200 m2 only which is
earmarked as Natural Cover as per RPG-2021, to
Settlement Zone by issuing Notification under sub-
-section (2) of Section 17 of the said Act;
Now, therefore, as directed by the Government
and in pursuance of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of
the Goa Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 (Act 21
of 1975), the following alteration/modification to
the RPG-2021 is hereby carried out, namely:-
In the RPG-2021, the zone of part of plot of land
admeasuring an area of 200 m2, surveyed under
Survey No. 289, sub-division No. 1-M, of Village
Loliem, Canacona Taluka, District South Goa, State
of Goa which is earmarked as Natural Cover as per
RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.
Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Planning).
Panaji, 8th August 2023.
——————
Office of the Chief Town Planner (Admin)
–––
Order
No. 1/3/TCP(Part-File)/2017-19/1564
Government is pleased to order the transfer and
posting of Shri Rajesh J. Naik, to the post of Chief
Town Planner (Administration)/HoD, with additional
charge of Chief Town Planner (Planning) in public
interest, with effect from the retirement on
superannuation of Shri James Mathew, Chief Town
Planner (Administration) on 31-07-2023.
By order and in the name of the Governor of
Goa.
Dr. Puneet Kumar Goel, IAS, Chief Secretary/
/Secretary (TCP).
Porvorim, 2nd August, 2023.
www.goaprintingpress.gov.in
Published and Printed by the Director, Printing & Stationery,
Government Printing Press,
Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.
PRICE–Rs. 18.00
PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA—165/80—08/2023.