Goa Gazette, No. 2324-45, 08 February 2024

click here for IIIF manifest

Reg. No. RNP/GOA/32/2024-2026

RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410Panaji, 8th February, 2024 (Magha 19, 1945) SERIES II No. 45

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

Note:- There is one Extraordinary issue to the Official

Gazette, Series II No. 44 dated 01-02-2024 namely,

Extraordinary dated 05-02-2024 from pages 1083

to 1084 regarding Notification from Department

of Finance.

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

Department of Co-operation

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies

––––

Order

No. 1-23-2000/EST/RCS/3971

Consequent upon the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee conveyed by the Goa Public Service Commission, Panaji vide letter No. COM/II/11/11(1)/95/518 dated 11-01-2024, the Government is pleased to promote Shri Dattaraj Naik to the post of Assistant Marketing Officer, Group "B" Gazetted in the establishment of Registrar of Co-op. Societies in the pay matrix Level 6 (as per VIIth Pay Commission) on regular basis, against vacant post of Shri Monal Manerikar.

The above Officer may exercise his option for fixation of pay under FR 22(1)(a)(1) within one month from the date of issue of this order. This option once exercised shall be final.

The Officer promoted shall be on probation for

a period of two years.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Arvind Bugde, Registrar (Co-op. Societies) &

ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Panaji, 30th January, 2024.

O rd er

No. 20/3/103/Elec./BOD/APCH/CZ/RCS/22/4014

Read: Letter No. 01/552/APCH/Elec./ARCS/22/

/2257 dated 27-07-2023 from the Unit

Incharge-II, O/o the Assistant Registrar of

Co-operative Societies, Central Zone,

Panaji-Goa to grant exemption from

applicability of Section 60(3) (b) in terms

of Section 126 A of the Goa Co-operative

Societies Act, 2001 to the Adwalpalkar's

Park Co-op. Housing Society Ltd.,

Bhatulem, St. Cruz, Tiswadi-Goa.

(Under Section 126A of the Goa Co-operative

Societies Act, 2001 (Goa Act No. 36 of 2001).

Whereas, the Adwalpalkar's Park Co-op. Housing

Society Ltd., Bhatulem, St. Cruz, Tiswadi-Goa was

registered on 09-06-2015 under Code Symbol/

/Registration No. [Reg. No. ARCS/CZ/737/7(b)/Goa]

and is having as on date, total membership of 34 as

per the voters list (hereafter referred as "said

Society" or as "Society").

And whereas, the Unit Incharge-II, O/o the Asstt.

Registrar of Co-op. Societies, Central Zone, Panaji-

-Goa, vide letter dated 27-07-2023 requested to grant

exemption from the applicability of the provisions of

Section 60(3) (b) of the Goa Co-operative Societies

Act, 2001 (Goa Act No. 36 of 2001) (hereafter referred

to as "said Act" or as "Act") by invoking powers under Section 126 A of the said Act as the society has conducted only two Annual General Body Meetings during the preceding 5 years. The strength of the Board of the said society consists of 07 (seven) Directors i.e. 4 (four) from the General Category, 2 (two) from Women Category and 1 (one) from SC or ST Category.

And whereas, as per the Circular No. 15-11-2017/ /RCS/2470 dated 01-08-2019 issued by Registrar of Co-operative Societies (RCS), under Clause "a" it has been specifically instructed that "The Exemption to Section 60(3)(b) of the Act shall be proposed only when management of the society has not convened atleast three Annual General Body meeting for the five years preceding the date of election, due to which the eligibility criteria of having attended atleast three Annual General Body meetings of the society during the period of five years preceding the election cannot be fulfilled from the applicability of above referred Section and a fresh date of election should be fixed instead of resorting to appoint the members on the Board by invoking the provisions of Section 67 (A) of the Act."

And whereas, as per the 126A (Powers to exempt societies from provision of this Act), the Government may, by general or special order, to be published in the Official Gazette, exempt any society or class of societies from any of the provisions of this Act, or may direct that such provision shall apply to such society or class of societies with such modifications not affecting the substance thereof as may be specified in the order. Provided that no order to the prejudice of any society shall be passed, without an opportunity being given to such society to present its case.

And whereas, the matter was referred to the Government in terms of Section 126 A of the Act for exempting the society from the applicability of Section 60 (3) (b) of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 (Goa Act No. 36 of 2001) and the Government vide U.O. No. 626/F dated 21-11-2023 has granted exemption from the applicability of above referred section.

Therefore, in terms of the exemption granted by ther Government under U.O. No. 626/F dated 21-11-2023 by exercising the power under Section 126 A of the Act, the Adwalpalkar's Park Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Bhatulem, St. Cruz, Tiswadi-Goa is hereby exempted from the applicability of provisions of Clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 60 of the Act, for the election of the Board of Director to be conducted for the term of 5 years i.e. 2024-2029.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Arvind Bugde, Registrar (Co-op. Societies) &

ex officio Jt. Secretary (Co-operation).

Panaji, 31st January, 2024.

Department of Education

Directorate of Education

––

Notification

(F.N. SCERT/GTET/Proposal to shift GTET/14/2023)

In view of the Notification No. F. No.-61-1/2011/ /NCTE (N&S) dated 29-07-2011, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-III, Section-4, No. 158 dated 02-08-2011 regarding minimum qualifications for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in Class I to VIII in a school referred to in Clause (n) of Section 2 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (Central Act 35 of 2009), the Government of Goa is pleased to declare that the persons desire to be teachers in Class I to VIII (Elementary) shall be required to qualify the Goa Teacher Eligibility Test (GTET). GTET will be conducted by Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education, Alto Betim-Goa from 2024 onwards.

The Test shall consist of two papers: Paper-1 for those who wish to be teachers in Classes I-V and Paper-II for those who wish to be teachers in Classes VI-VIII. The date of Examination for both Paper I & Paper II of GTET will be conducted separately as Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education, Alto Betim-Goa from time to time. The eligibility criteria to appear in the test, the test structure, content, language, certification, applicability etc. are given below:

1. Eligibility to appear in GTET:

1.1 GTET-Paper-I (for Primary Stage: Classes I-V):

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and passed or appearing in the final year of a 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known).

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 45% marks and passed or appearing in the final year of a 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure), Regulations, 2002.

OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and passed or appearing in the final year of a 4-year Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.EI.Ed).

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and passed or appearing in the final year of a 2-year Diploma in Education (Special Education).

OR

Graduation with atleast 50% marks and Bachelor

of Education (B.Ed.).

"(a) who has acquired the qualification of Bachelor of Education from any NCTE recognized institution shall be considered for appointment as a teacher in Classes I to V provided the person so appointed as a teacher shall mandatorily undergo a six month Bridge Course in Elementary Education recognized by the NCTE, within two years of such appointment as primary teacher)".

1.2 GTET- Paper-II (for Elementary/Upper Primary

Stage: Classes VI-VIII).

Graduation and passed or appearing in the final year of a 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known).

OR

Graduation with atleast 50% marks and passed or

appearing in Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.).

OR Graduation with atleast 45% marks and passed or appearing in Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations issued from time to time in this regard.

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and passed or appearing in the final year of a 4-year Bachelor in Elementary Education (B.EI.Ed.).

OR

Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with atleast 50% marks and passed or appearing in the final year of a 4-year B.A./B.Sc.Ed or B.A.Ed/B.Sc.Ed.

OR

Graduation with atleast 50% marks, passed or

appearing in B.Ed. (Special Education).

OR

Any candidate having qualified B.Ed. Programme recognized by the NCTE is eligible to appear in GTET.

Moreover, as per the existing TET guidelines circulated vide NCTE letter dated 11-02-2011, a person who is pursuing any of the teacher education courses (recognized by the NCTE or the RCI, as the case may be) specified in the NCTE Notification dated 23rd August, 2010 is also qualified to appear in the GTET.

Note:

i. Relaxation up to 5% in the qualifying marks in the minimum Educational Qualification for eligibility shall be allowed to the candidates belonging to reserved categories, such as SC/ST/OBC/Differently Abled.

ii. Diploma/Degree Course in Teacher Education: For this Notification, a Diploma/Degree course in teacher education recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) only shall be considered. However, in the case of Diploma in Education (Special Education) and B.Ed. (Special Education), a course recognized by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) only shall be considered.

iii. Training to be undergone: A person with D.Ed (Special Education) shall undergo, after appointment, an NCTE recognized 6-months Special Programme in Elementary Education.

iv. The minimum qualifications referred above apply to teachers of Languages, Social Studies/Social Science, Mathematics, Science etc. In respect of teachers for Physical Education, the minimum qualification norms for Physical Education teachers referred to in NCTE Regulation, dated 3rd November, 2001 (as amended from time to time) shall be applicable. For teachers of Art Education, Craft Education, Home Science, Work Education, etc. the existing eligibility norms prescribed by the State Governments and other school managements shall be applicable till such time the NCTE lays down the minimum qualifications in respect of such teachers.

v. A person who is pursuing any of the teacher education courses (recognized by the NCTE or the RCI, as the case may be) specified in the NCTE Notification dated 29th July, 2011 shall be eligible for appearing in the GTET.

2. Structure and Content of GTET:

All questions in GTET will be Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs), with four alternatives out of which one answer will be most appropriate. Each question will carry one mark and there will be no negative marking for wrong response.

There will be two papers on GTET:

(i) Paper I will be for a person who intends to be a

teacher for Classes I to V.

(ii) Paper II will be for a person who intends to be a

teacher for Classes VI to VIII.

Note: A person who intends to be a teacher for both levels (Classes I to V and Classes VI to VIII) will have to appear in both the papers (Paper I and Paper II).

2.1 Content: Paper-I Primary Stage (For Classes

I to V).

(Duration: 150 Minutes).

(i) Child Development 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

and Pedagogy (Compulsory)

(ii) Language I 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

(Compulsory)

(iii) Language II 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

(Compulsory)1087 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 (iv) Mathematics 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

(v) Environmental Studies 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

Total: 150 MCQs 150 Marks.

Nature and standard of questions:

• The test items on Child Development and Pedagogy will focus on educational psychology of teaching and learning relevant to the age group of 6-11 years. They will focus on understanding the characteristics and needs of diverse learners, interaction with learners and the attributes and qualities of a good facilitator of learning.

•The test items in Language I will focus on the elements of language, communication and comprehension abilities.

•The test items in Language II will focus on the elements of language, communication and comprehension abilities.

• Language II will be a language other than Language I. English is treated as Language I in GTET and for Language II a candidate may choose either Konkani or Marathi.

•The test items in Mathematics and Environmental Studies will focus on the concepts, problem solving abilities and pedagogical understanding and applications of the subjects. In all these subject areas, the test items will be evenly distributed over different divisions of the syllabus (Appendix I) of that subject prescribed for Classes I-V by the SCERT.

•The subject content questions will be based on the topics prescribed in the syllabus of the SCERT for Classes I-V but their difficulty level as well as linkages, could be up to the Secondary stage.

2.2 Content: Paper-II Elementary Stage (For Classes

VI to VIII).

(Duration: 150 Minutes).

(i) Child Development 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

& Pedagogy (Compulsory)

(ii) Language I 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

(Compulsory)

(iii) Language II 30 MCQs 30 Marks.

(Compulsory)

(iv) Mathematics and 60 MCQs 60 Marks.

Science (for Mathematics and Science teacher)

(v) Social Studies/Social 60 MCQs 60 Marks.

Science (for Social Studies/Social

Science teacher) For any other teacher either (IV) or (V)

Total: 150 MCQs 150 Marks.

Nature and standard of questions:

• The test items on Child Development and Pedagogy will focus on educational psychology of teaching and learning, relevant to the age group of 11-14 years. They will focus on understanding the characteristics, needs and psychology of diverse learners, interaction with learners and the attributes and qualities of a good facilitator of learning.

• The test items in Language I will focus on the elements of language, communication and comprehension abilities.

• The test items in Language II will focus on the elements of language, communication and comprehension abilities.

• Language II will be a language other than Language I. English is treated as Language I in GTET and for Language II a candidate may choose either Konkani or Marathi.

• The test items in Mathematics and Science, and Social Studies/Social Science will focus on the concepts, problem solving abilities and pedagogical understanding and applications of the subjects. The test items of Mathematics and Science will be of 30 marks each. The test items will be evenly distributed over different divisions of the syllabus of that subject as prescribed for Classes VI-VIII by the SCERT.

• The subject content questions will be based on the topics prescribed in syllabus of the SCERT for Classes VI-VIII but their difficulty level as well as linkages, could be up to the Senior Secondary stage.

3. Language of GTET:

The question paper shall be in English except for Language-II. Language-II paper will be in the respective languages.

4. Qualifying Marks for award of GTET Certificate.

As per NCTE revised guidelines (Elementary) 2016 for conducting TET and the GTET rules as approved by the Government of Goa a person must score 60% (90 out of 150) or more in the whole TET to be declared as TET pass.

(a) School managements (Government, local bodies, Government aided and unaided) may consider giving concessions to person belonging to SC, ST, OBC, differently abled persons, etc., in accordance with their extant reservation policy.

(b) School managements should give weightage to the GTET scores in the recruitment1088 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 process however, qualifying the GTET would not confer a right on any person for recruitment/ /employment as it is only one of the eligibility criteria for appointment.

5. Applicability of GTET:

GTET shall be mandatory for appointment of teachers at Elementary stage (i.e. Classes I-VIII) and apply to the following schools within the Jurisdiction of the State of Goa.

A school established, owned and controlled by

Government of Goa or a Local Authority;

A school receiving grant-in-aid from the Government of Goa to meet whole or part of its expenses; and

A school not receiving any aids or grants from the

Government of Goa to meet its expenses.

6. Validity period of GTET Certificate:

Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education will issue certificates to all successful candidates qualifying GTET and the certificate shall be valid for lifetime.

There is no restriction on the number of attempts a person can make to acquire a GTET Certificate.

A person who has qualified GTET may also

appear to improve score.

IV A duplicate copy of Marks Statement or GTET Pass Certificate may be issued to desiring candidates in genuine cases by submitting an application stating the cause and by remitting a fee as prescribed by the Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary. Fee is subject to revision from time to time.

7. Examination fee for GTET:

As prescribed by the Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary. Fee is subject to revision from time to time.

GST will be charged over and above the examination fees by the banks as per the applicability.

Fee once remitted shall not be refunded or adjusted for future tests under any circumstances.

8. Verification of Eligibility:

a) The candidate should satisfy his/her eligibility before applying and shall be personally responsible in case he/she is not eligible to apply as per the given eligibility criteria.

b) If a candidate has been allowed to appear in the Goa Teacher Eligibility Test it does not imply that the candidate's eligibility has been verified by Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary.

c) Qualifying in GTET shall not confer any right on any person for recruitment as a teacher as it is only the eligibility condition along with other eligibility criteria as laid down by the competent authority in accordance with Goa Education Act.

d) All eligibility criteria including the passing of GTET shall be finally verified by the concerned recruiting agency/appointing authority.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Sd/-, Director of Education & ex officio Joint

Secretary (School Education).

Porvorim, 24th January, 2024.

——————

Directorate of Higher Education

––– Certificate No. ACAD III/GC/Filling Asst. Prof./115/2018/Part-IV/ /12272

Read: Order No. ACAD III/GC/FILLING ASST.

PROF./115/2018/Part-IV/9252.

Certified that the character and antecedents of Ms. Priyanka Devu Velip appointed to the post of Assistant Professor in Hindi (Group 'A' Gazetted) in ST Category at Government College of Arts, Science & Commerce, Quepem under Directorate of Higher Education vide above referred Order has been verified by the Addl. Collector and ADM, South Goa and nothing adverse has been reported against her at concerned Police Station and other Police Stations in Goa.

Sanjana Dipak Bandekar, Under Secretary (Higher

Education).

Porvorim, 6th February, 2024.

——————

Department of General Administration

–––

Addendum

No. 37/1/2023-GAD-III/351

Read: Notification No. 37/1/2023-GAD-III/288

dated 17-01-2024.

The following para shall be added to the above read Notification dated 17-01-2024 declaring Public Holiday on 22nd January, 2024 on occasion of the grand ceremony of consecration of idol of Prabhu Shri Ram at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh:-

"The above public holiday is also declared under Section 25 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881".

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Shaila G. Bhosle, Under Secretary (GA-I).

Porvorim, 20th January, 2024.

Department of Industries

–––

Notification

No. 3/11/2023-IND/46

Read: Government Notification No. 3/11/2023-IND/333 dated 29-12-2023, published in the Official Gazette, Series II No. 40 dated 04-01-2024 in respect of the Project Proponent M/s. BramhaCorp Theme Park LLP.

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 43 of the Goa Investment Promotion and Facilitation of Single Window Clearance Act, 2021 (Goa Act 19 of 2021), the Government of Goa hereby appoints a Planning, Development and Construction Committee, consisting of the following members, for the Investment Promotion Area declared by the Government vide Notification cited above, in respect of the Project Proponent M/s. BramhaCorp Theme Park LLP to establish a theme park/garden in Goa in Pernem Village, Pernem Taluka, North Goa:-

(i) Chief Secretary — Chairperson.

(ii) Principal Secretary/Secretary (Industries) — Member.

(iii) Director, Directorate of Industries, Trade and Commerce — Member.

(iv) Chief Town Planner (Planning) — Member.

(v) Director, Directorate of Health Services — Member.

(vi) Director of Fire and Emergency Services — Member.

(vii) Chief Inspector of Factories and Boilers — Member.

(viii) Chief Electrical Engineer, Electricity Department — Member.

(ix) Principal Chief Engineer, Public Works Department — Member.

(x) Principal Chief Conservator of Forests — Member.

(xi) Member Secretary, Goa State Pollution Control Board — Member.

(xii) Member Secretary, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority — Member.

(xiii) District Collector, North Goa — Member.

(xiv) District Collector, South Goa — Member.

(xv) Chief Executive Officer of the Board — Member Secretary.

The said Committee shall exercise all the powers, such as, control or erection of building, etc. and all other powers conferred on it by the Goa Investment Promotion and Facilitation of Single Window Clearance Act, 2021 (Goa Act 19 of 2021).

This Notification shall come into force on the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Asha Harmalkar, Under Secretary (Industries).

Porvorim, 25th January, 2024.

2. On receipt of the reference, a case was

registered under No. LC-II/IT/01/15 and registered Department of Labour ––

A/D notice was issued to the Parties. In pursuance

Notification

No. 28/02/2024-LAB/Part-I/41

The following Award passed by the Labour Court-II,

at Panaji-Goa on 15-12-2023 in Case No. LC-II/IT/08/

/2019 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.

Asha Harmalkar, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 19th January, 2024.

–––– IN THE LABOUR COURT-II GOVERNMENT OF GOA AT PANAJI

(Before Shri Suresh N. Narulkar Hon'ble Presiding Officer)

Case No. LC-II/IT/08/2019

Mrs. Rupa U. Naik Madkaikar, R/o. Flat No. BS-I, IInd Floor, Filomina Complex, Merces, St. Cruz, Goa. …… Workperson/Party I

V/s

M/s. Goa Carbon Ltd., Dempo House, Campal, Panaji-Goa. …… Employer/Party II

Workperson/Party I represented by Adv. Shri R. Gauthankar.

Employer/Party II represented by Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat.

Panaji, Dated: 15-12-2023 to the said notice, the Parties put in their appearance. The Workperson/Party-I (for short 'Workperson'), filed her Statement of Claim on 25-03-2019 at Exb-4. The facts of the case in brief as pleaded by the Workperson are that she was appointed as stenographer by the Employer/Party-II (for short, "Employer") on 07-11-1994 on temporary basis. She stated that thereafter she was confirmed on the said post vide letter dated 06-02-1996. She stated that as a stenographer, she was doing the work of stenographer i.e. taking dictation, typing and computer work under Mr. J. A Botelhas and Mr. Mohan R. Haldankar, marketing department and commercial department respectively of the Employer.

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 28-01-2019, bearing No. 28/6/2018-LAB/95, referred the following dispute for adjudication to the Labour Court-II at Panaji-Goa, constituted under Section 7(1) of the said Act.

"(1) Whether the action of the management of Goa Carbon Limited, Campal, Panaji-Goa in dismissing the service of Mrs. Rupa U. Naik Madkaikar, Sr. Receptionist-cum-Sr. Clerk- -II, w.e.f. 30-09-2015 , is legal and justified?

(2) If not, to what relief the workperson is entitled to?" 3. She stated that in the year 2001, her designation was changed to Sr. Receptionist-cum- Sr. Clerk-II vide letter dated 23-03-2001 in the letter of revision of pay scale. She stated that the said action of the Employer is not proper and it amounts to change in service condition. She stated that after changing her designation as Receptionist-cum-Sr. clerk-II, she was directed to do the work under dispatch, purchase work and share department work. She stated that later the dispatch work was allotted to the Peons Mr. Lawrence Pereira and Mr. Jayram Gaonkar. She stated that in the year 2005, she was transferred to reception EPABX/Board counter at 4th floor and requested to report to Lt. COL. K. D. Lima, Manager Administration of V. S. Dempo and Company. She stated that after serving for more than 9 years under V. S. Dempo, she was again transferred in the Employer company on 10-04-2014 to dispatch section. She stated that the Employer company and V. S. Dempo and Company are different entities. She stated that she was instructed to work in V. S. Dempo holding and company mail section and further requested to report Mr. Wilfred Dsouza, Sr. Manager, Administration for taking instructions regarding discharge of day to day work as there was a permanent vacancy which arose due to demise of Mr. Tari who was looking after the work of handling of the mails, inward and outward of all the concerns of V. S. Dempo group of companies. She stated that Mr. Tari was doing the dispatch work letters in V. S. Dempo and company at the time of his death which occurred due to heart attack.

4. She stated that she was given the same post in the same place to work in the mail section. She stated that the said work place where she was asked1091 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 to work was a lonely place and there were no other co-staffs in the room where the recent incident of death of above staff Mr. Tari had occured. She stated that she being a female staff, requested the management that she was scared to work in that lonely place. She stated that the Employer did not consider her request and thereafter blocked her attendance swapping card where the door of the office which opens only on swapping the card on 21-02-2015 and on 23-02-2015 restrained her from entering the office by the deploying special lady security. She stated that per the procedure followed for marking presence, she continuously recorded her attendance from 27-01-2015 till Saturday 14-02-2015 but the management did not paid the salary for that period. She stated that thereafter, she was on leave on account of sickness, stress and tension. She stated that she rejoined her duties on Saturday 21-02-2015 by recording the attendance on the said machine however she did not know if her attendance was recorded on the said machine. She stated that when she came to office on Monday i.e. 23-02-2015, her entry was denied into the office by deploying special female security. She stated that thereafter she could not record her attendance nor she was allowed to meet the management by the security personnel.

5. She stated that she was suspended without giving any show cause notice or opportunity of being heard. She stated that she was issued a charge-sheet dated 20-02-2015 for making false allegation which are very ambiguous and are the base of unfair labour practice. She stated that the Employer made total baseless allegation and intentionally suspended her service on false ground. She stated that she replied to the charge- sheet by her reply dated 02-03-2015 but the management simply refused to accept the clarifications out sighting the reason vide letter dated 16-03-2015.

6. She stated that after replying to the false charge sheet, the Employer commenced the enquiry proceedings against her by appointing Mr. A.M. Gaikwad as Inquiry Officer. She stated that said Mr. A.M. Gaikwad was a former employee of the same Employer group of companies. She stated that the enquiry conducted by said Mr. A.M. Gaikwad was in a biased manner without following the due procedure of law only to favour the Employer thereby denying justice to her. She stated that she was also not given a proper opportunity in the enquiry to defend herself and the evidence was recorded as per the whims of the Inquiry Officer. She stated that the Ld. Enquiry Officer has conducted the said enquiry in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. She stated that Ld. Inquiry Officer has not properly recorded the cross examination of the Employer's witnesses and that the cross examination has been recorded in question answer format with oblique motive to conceal the true facts. She stated that the said enquiry was decided against her. She stated that the enquiry is perverse and no proper reason has been given to conclude the allegations which has been framed in the charge-sheet against her. She stated that the Ld. Inquiry Officer has ignored/overlooked all the evidence in her favour. She stated that the enquiry conducted by the Employer is biased and in violation of the principles of natural justice. She submitted that the management had acted maliciously and vindictively in terminating her services. She stated that there is no acceptable evidence to terminate her services and therefore the dismissal is illegal. She stated that as the Employer did not reinstate her in service, she raised an industrial dispute before the Asst. Labour Commissioner Panaji which ended in failure. She stated that the action of the Employer in refusing her entry in the office w.e.f. 23-02-2015 is illegal unjust and malafide. She stated that the refusal of employment w.e.f. 30-09-2015 is illegal and unfair labour practice.

7. She stated that the findings of the Inquiry Officer are perverse and liable to be set aside. She stated that she was issued order of dismissal on 30-09-2015. She stated that she was also not paid last month's subsistence allowance as per the law, which shows that the management has conducted the enquiry one sided. She stated that based upon false and arbitrary enquiry report, the Workperson was issued showcause notice dated 14-09-2015 which was replied by her on 22-09-2015. She stated that the showcause notice which was issued, should have been given to her before suspending from the service. She stated that before denying the entry from the service from 23-02-2015, no opportunity or explanation was asked from her. She stated that the Employer terminated her services on 30-09-2015 by illegal and arbitrary manner. Without prejudice, she stated that the enquiry conducted against her did not prove any allegations made in the charge sheet dated 20-02-2015. She submitted that the punishment of termination imposed upon her is shockingly disproportionate. She stated that the amount sent to her as full and final settlement of dues in form of cheques is disputed and the said cheque have been returned back to the Employer. She stated that she was subjected to firstly1092 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 demotion and thereafter illegal termination by way of victimization. She stated that the termination of her service is illegal and she is required to be reinstated in service with continuity and all other monetary benefitsas well as pending promotional avenues.

8. She stated that since her dismissal from service, she could not succeed in getting any job and that she is unemployed from the date of termination till date. The Workperson therefore prayed that the action of the Employer in terminating her services vide letter dated 30-09-2015 is illegal, unjustified and bad in law and that direct the Employer to reinstate her in service with full back wages and continuity in service and consequential benefits thereof.

the extended period of probation was again viewed by the Marketing Manager and observed that the Workperson had put in more efforts in improving her spelling and that the Workperson has also proved that she was a reasonable substitute for Mr. Dancho, Sr. Clerk who had gone on leave for preparing export documentation. The Employer stated that based on the observations of the Marketing Manager, the Workperson was issued a letter dated 06-02-1996 confirming her as a stenographer w.e.f. 01-02-1996 with all the terms and conditions stipulated in the letter dated 06-11-1995 and 29-04-1995 remaining unaltered. The Employer stated that as per the service conditions in the letter of appointment dated 29-4-1995, the Workperson was required to do such other work responsibilities as may be assigned to her by the management from time to time. The Employer stated that from the date of her appointment with them, the Workperson was carrying out the duties of a stenographer as well as other duties without any grievances. The Employer stated that during the period of her service, the Workperson had worked in reception, dispatch section, inward, outward correspondence etc. The Employer stated that w.e.f. 01-04-2000 the Workperson was designated as Sr. Receptionist-cum-Sr. Clerk-II with all the terms and conditions of her confirmation letter remained the same. The Employer stated that on re-designation, the Workperson was fitted at the higher pay scale of 1100-65-1425-75-1800-85-2225- -95-2007-105-3225-115-3800 from the earlier pay scale of 740-48-980-53-1245-58-1535-63-1850-68- -2190-73-2555 applicable to the category of stenographer. The Employer stated that a letter dated 23-03-2001 was issued to the Workperson to that effect. The Employer stated that by such re- designation, the Workperson was not demoted but was given the higher pay scale than the one drawn by the Workperson in the year 2000. The Employer stated that the Workperson accepted the re-designation under the said letter dated 23-03-2001 without any grievance and continued to work as Sr. Receptionist-cum-Sr. Clerk-II with them.

10. The Employer stated that the Workperson was issued a show cause notice dated 12-08-2002 alleging that on 08-11-2001 the Workperson had received 40 equity share certificates while working in the dispatch section and had not delivered the same to the share department after registering in the mail inward register. The Employer stated that the Workperson in reply dated 13-08-2002 to the said allegations, had admitted that it was fully her responsibility to see that inward mail is securely 9. The Employer resisted the claim of the Workperson by filing its written statement on 25-07-2019 at Exb. 7. The Employer admitted that the Workperson was appointed as a stenographer by them vide letter of appointment dated 07-11-1994 on temporary basis for a period of six months. The Employer stated that thereafter the Workperson was taken in a permanent vacancy as a stenographer vide letter dated 29-04-1995 w.e.f. 07-05-1995 on probation for a period of six months. The Employer stated that under Clause 7 of the said probation letter dated 29-04-1995 the Workperson besides the duties of a stenographer, was liable to carry out such other work/responsibilities as may be assigned to her by the management from time to time. The Employer stated that in terms of the said letter dated 29-04-1995, the Workperson continued as a probationer w.e.f. 07-05-1995. The Employer stated that as a stenographer, the Workperson was allotted the scale of pay of 560-33-725-39-920-45- -1145-51-1400-57-1685 which is applicable to the category mainly clerical. The Employer stated that the performance of the Workperson was viewed by the marketing manager in October 1995 and observed that the work of the Workperson as a steno typist was not upto the mark and that the Workperson was asked to work harder at improving her grammar and spelling. The Employer stated that the marketing manager also suggested that the Workperson be retained as a typist clerk or would be transferred to another department on probation for a second assessment. The Employer stated that the probation period of the Workperson was then extended for further period of three months from 07-11-1995 vide letter dated 06-11-1995 on the same terms and conditions of service specified in the original letter dated 29-04-1995. The Employer stated that the performance of the Workperson in1093 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 delivered to the concern department. The Employer stated that the Workperson was issued a charge sheet dated 26-08-2002 and the Workperson filed her reply dated 17-09-2002 to the same. The Employer stated that they then conducted a departmental enquiry against the Workperson in the charges alleged against her. The Employer stated that the Workperson in her statement before the Inquiry Officer, has stated that she was working as Sr. Receptionist from Sr. Clerk. The Employer stated that after having found guilty in the enquiry held against the Workperson, they issued a warning letter dated 07-11-2002 to the Workperson and further cautioned the Workperson that repetition of such or similar misconduct in future will be viewed seriously.

11. The Employer stated that vide letter dated 25-01-2005, the Workperson was transferred to reception/EPABX BOARD counter at 4th floor of the office of M/s. V. S. Dempo Holdings Pvt. Ltd. in terms of Clause 6 of her letter of appointment dated 29-04-1995. The Employer stated that such transfer from one company to another is always on deputation and the employee remains to be an employee of the Employer who had appointed her. The Employer stated that such an employee could be brought back or sent back to the Employer Company at any time. The Employer stated that the Workperson while working as a Receptionist-cum- -Sr. Clerk had gained revisions in the pay scales from time to time and the Workperson had accepted the same without any dispute or grievances. The Employer stated that vide letter dated 15-04-2008, the Workperson was allotted the revised scale of pay of 1700-150-2450-185-3375-220-4475-255-5750- -290-7200 w.e.f. 01-04-2008 by the Employer as a Sr. Clerk/Sr. Receptionist.

12. The Employer stated that vide letter dated 03-04-2014, M/s V. S. Dempo Holding Pvt. Ltd. advised the Workperson to report back to the Employer for a placement and taking instructions regarding her work with immediate effect and was also relived accordingly on 3-4-2014. The Employer stated that in terms of the said letter dated 03-04-2014, the Workperson was required to report to the Employer. The Employer stated that the Workperson, however did not report to the Employer as advised vide letter dated 03-04-2014, and continued to sit idle at the 4th floor in the office of M/s V. S. Dempo Holding Pvt. Ltd. The Employer stated that a letter dated 10-04-2014 was issued to the Workperson informing her that the Workperson did not comply with the directions issued to her to report to the office of the Employer and advised the Workperson to report for duty at dispatch section of the Employer with immediate effect. The Employer stated that the Workperson was also informed that if she fails to report with immediate effect the dispatch section of the Employer, they may take necessary disciplinary action against the Workperson for unauthorized and willful absence and disobedience of the order of transfer. The Employer stated that the Workperson thereafter reported to the Employer and was placed for dispatch work at the place where some common services like reception-cum-EPABX/Security/ /dispatch/counter etc. are shared by the employees in Dempo Group at Head Office.

13. The Employer stated that vide letter dated 24-01-2015, the Workperson was instructed to attend the office work in the mail section on the ground floor of the Dempo house w.e.f. 27-01-2015. The Employer stated that the Workperson refused to accept the said communication when offered to her. The Employer stated that the Workperson was thereafter called by Mr. U. G. Shirodkar, Sr. Manager (P&HR) and Mr. Wilfred Dsouza, Sr. Manger (Administration) on 27-01-2015 and explained to the Workperson the contents of the said letter dated 24-01-2015 and tried to persuade and advised her to attend the office work as per letter dated 24-01-1995. The Employer stated that the Workperson however refused to attend the work on the ground floor and continued to disobey the lawful and reasonable orders of her superiors. The Employer stated that as the Workperson failed to attend to the assigned work as instructed by her superiors during the working hours of 27-01-2015, the Workperson was issued a letter dated 28-01-2015 inviting her attention that her act of not attending to the work assigned to her by her superiors amounts to misconduct of disobedience of lawful and reasonable orders of her superiors, besides she being not entitled to her wages on the principle of "No work No wages". The Employer stated that inspite of letter dated 28-01-2015, the Workperson did not attend to the work entrusted to her and continued to remain idle without doing any work during the working hours. The Employer stated that they also gave further and last opportunity to the Workperson to attend the office work in the mail section, vide letter dated 30-01-2015, as per the written instructions given to the Workperson vide letters dated 24-01-2015 and 28-01-2015. The Employer stated that they advised the Workperson to attend to the work assigned to her as per the instructions of her superiors to avoid further actions against her. The Employer stated1094 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 that the Workperson was however adamant not to work at the dispatch counter on the ground floor. The Employer stated that the Workperson filed her reply dated 02-02-2015 to the letters dated 28-01-2015 and 30-01-2015 admitting that she was offered the said letters by the Employer officials and had not reported to the place of work. The Employer stated that the Workperson also mailed further unwanted allegations against its officers in support of her reply dated 02-02-2015. The Employer stated that they sent a reply dated 20-02-2015 to the Workperson denying all the allegations made against them and its officers and reiterated that the Workperson refused to report to the place of work and remained idle for all the days from 27-01-2015 to 31-01-2015 and as such the Workperson was not entitled for wages for the said days on the principle of "No work No wage". The Employer stated that the Workperson had continued to sit idle upto 14-02-2015. The Employer stated that since the Workperson continued to disobey the orders of her superiors, by not reporting to the place of work i.e. mail section on the ground floor and sat idle from 27-01-2015 to 14-02-2015 inspite of repeated written instructions, they issued a suspension order dated 14-02-2015 to the Workperson suspending her from the service with immediate effect pending departmental enquiry to the misconduct committed by the Workperson.

14. The Employer stated that thereafter they issued a chargesheet cum notice of inquiry dated 20-02-2015 to the Workperson alleging misconducts namely, (1)………..willful insubordination or disobedience……….. or …….any lawful or reasonable order of a superiors, (2)…….disorderly behavior during working hours at the establishment or act subversive of discipline. (3)…………breach of any law applicable to the establishment, and (4) Refusal to accept any……………. Order or notice commuted in writing. The Employer stated that the Workperson was called upon to file her explanation to the said charge sheet within 7 days of the receipt of the same and fixing the enquiry on 10-03-2015 at 2.30 p.m. at the Dempo House, Campal, Panaji-Goa. The Employer stated that thereafter an enquiry was held against the Workperson by Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, Inquiry Officer (for short the IO) on 10-03-2015, 17-03-2015, 22-04-2015, 03-06-2015, 16-06-2015, 22-06-2015, 01-07-2015, 15-07-2015. The enquiry was concluded on 15-07-2015. The Employer stated that the Workperson fully participated in the enquiry throughout and signed the proceedings on day to day basis after going through the same. The Employer stated that on the first date of enquiry i.e.

10-03-2015, the Inquiry Officer asked the Workperson as to whether the Workperson would like to be represented by any co-employee to which the Workperson informed the Inquiry Officer that she will defend her case by herself. The Employer stated that the Inquiry Officer also explained her the procedure of enquiry in detail and recorded the same in the enquiry proceedings of 10-03-2015. The Employer stated that the Management Representative gave his statement and produced the documents on record of the enquiry on 10-03-2015 and continued his statement on 17-03-2015 i.e. the next date of hearing. The Employer stated that on conclusion of the statement of Management Representative, the Workperson was given an opportunity to cross examine Management Representative. The Employer stated that the cross examination of Management Representative was done on 22-04-2015 by the Workperson and concluded the same by putting only one question denying the allegations made against the Workperson. The Employer stated that thereafter the Employer examined Mr. Wilfred D' Souza, as Management Witness 1 (MW1) and the Workperson stated that she does not wish to cross examine MW1 when the Inquiry Officer asked her to proceed with the cross of MW1. The Employer stated that enquiry was then adjourned on 29-04-2015 on which date the same could not be conducted and then held on 3-6-2015 on which date of statement of 2nd witness of the Employer was recorded and was cross examined by the Employer. The Employer stated that they examined the third witness on 16-06-2015 and was cross examined by the Workperson and the management evidence was closed on 16-06-2015. The Employer stated that on 22-06-2015 the Workperson gave her statement in defense and produced a written statement dated 22-06-2015. The Employer stated that the Workperson was cross examined by the Management Representative on 01-07-2015 and 15-7-2015. The Employer stated that on 15-07-2015, after the conclusion of cross examination of the Workperson, the Workperson was given an opportunity to examine her defense witness if any, to which the Workperson stated that she does not wish to examine any witness in her defense. The Employer stated that the enquiry was then concluded on 15-07-2015. The Employer stated that thereafter, the Inquiry Officer gave his findings on 04-08-2015 holding the Workperson guilty of the misconducts of charges 1, 2 and 4 of the charge sheet. The Employer stated that thereafter the Employer vide its letter No. PER.2015/VIII/253 dated 28-05-2015 furnished a copy of the findings of the Inquiry Officer to the Workperson and requested1095 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 Labour Commissioner on 01-02-2016 challenging her termination which ended in failure. The Employer stated that the past record of the Workperson was also not good. The Employer stated that the Workperson was cautioned on 29-5-1998 for her negligence in typing, issued show cause on 22-2-2000 for gross negligence and severely warned for negligence in performing her duties, issued show cause notice on 12-8-2002 for not handing over to the share department 40 equity share certificates for demand received from one of its shareholders sent by standard chartered bank for dematerialization and warned severely on 7-11-2002 after conducting a thorough enquiry against her. The Employer stated that under the circumstances explained above and proving of the charge against the Workperson and her habitual disobedience of the orders of the superiors, coupled with the bad past record, the action of discharge taken against the Workperson is just, legal and bonafide and the Workperson is not entitled to any relief as claimed. The Employer stated that in the event the enquiry conducted against the Workperson is set aside for any reason and the findings are also set aside, they craves leave to adduce evidence before this court to prove the charges levelled against the Workperson in the charge sheet dated 20-2-2015. The Employer denies the over all case as pleaded by the Workperson and prayed for dismissal of the present reference.

the Workperson to file her comments, if any, on the said findings within 7 days of the receipt of the same. The Employer stated that the Workperson filed her comments on 31-8-2015. The Employer stated that after perusing the comments of the Employer viz a viz the records of the enquiry findings of Inquiry Officer and related documents, the Employer was not satisfied with the comments of the Workperson on the findings of the Inquiry Officer and a show cause notice No. PER-2015/IX/126 dated 14-9-2015 was issued to the Workperson to show cause as to why the Workperson should not be dismissed from the services. The Employer stated that the Workperson filed her explanation to the show cause notice on 22-9-2015 and reiterated her statement in comments, in brief. The Employer stated that having not satisfied with the explanation to the show cause notice and taking into consideration the past record of the Workperson, the Employer discharged the Workperson from service with immediate effect vide letter No. PER-2744 dated 30-9-2015. The Employer stated that alongwith with the letter of discharge dated 30-9-2015, the Workperson was offered an amount of Rs. 36,722/- by Account Payee Cheque No. 148159 dated 30-9-2015 drawn on SBI Panaji towards balance subsistence allowance upto the date of discharge and a month's wage in lieu of notice. The Employer stated that thereafter, the Employer made a final settlement of the Workperson vide letter dated 31-10-2015 and sent a cheque No. 145228 dated 29-10-2015 for Rs. 2,15,290/- towards full and final settlement of her gratuity for the services rendered upto 30-9-2015. The Employer also paid the encashment of balance leave, the PF and Bonus to the Workperson with separate cheques drawn in her name. The Employer stated that the Workperson wrote a letter dated 03-10-2015 to the Employer in which the Workperson returned the cheque No. 148159 dated 30-9-2015 for Rs. 36,722/- to the Employer. The Employer stated that the Workperson thereafter returned back the cheques issued to her towards payment of Leave Encashment, Gratuity and Provident Fund under letter dated 25-1-2016. The Employer stated that thereafter the Employer deposited the cheque of gratuity of the Workperson before the Commissioner, Labour and Employment, Govt. of Goa, Panaji and the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 vide letter dated 11-03-2016. The Employer stated that the Workperson was free to approach the Controlling Authority and withdraw the said amount by making an appropriate application.

16. Thereafter, the Workperson filed her rejoinder on 11-10-2019 at Exb. 8. The Workperson, as and by way of his Rejoinder, affirms and confirms all statements and submissions made by him in her Statement of Claim and denies all averments made by the Employer in its Written Statement as well as Additional Written Statements which are contradictory to or inconsistent with her case as set out in her Claim Statement. She stated that the Employer has not revised her pay scale but it is settlement of pay scale of all the staff which is done once in four years and not hers only. She stated that it is her demotion by changing her designation as Sr. Clerk from Stenographer. She stated that her transfer from the Employer to M/s V. S. Dempo Holdings Pvt. Ltd. was not legal. She stated that she reported to the Employer where she was asked forcefully to work in dispatch section of Dempo Group at Head Office at the place where some common services like reception-cum-EPABX/ /security/dispatch/counter etc. are shared by the employees in Dempo Group at Head Office. She stated that she had objected when she was asked to report in this section as the said department was not of Employer Company. She stated that there was no proof that equity share were lost by her and 15. The Employer stated that thereafter, the Workperson raised an industrial dispute before the1096 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 that the inward correspondence/shares were been looked after by other staff and it was known with whom it has been misplaced/lost. She stated that her dismissal from service is illegal and unfair labour practice.

17. Based on the pleadings filed by the parties hereinabove, this Hon'ble court framed certain issues on 23-10-2019 at Exb. 9. Among the said issues, the Issue No. 1 & 2 has been treated as preliminary issues.

1. Whether the Workperson/Party I proves that a free, fair and proper enquiry was not conducted against her in respect of charge- sheet dated 20-02-2015 in accordance with the principles of natural justice?

2. Whether the Employer/Party-II proves that the charges of misconduct leveled against her vide charge-sheet dated 20-02-2015 have been proved to the satisfaction of this court by acceptable evidence?

3. Whether the Workman/Party I proves that the action of the Employer in dismissing her from services w.e.f. 30-09-2015, is illegal and unjustified?

4. Whether the Workman/Party I proves that the action of the Employer in dismissing her services amounts to unfair labour practice and victimization?

5. Whether the Workman is entitled to any

relief?

6. What order? What award?

18. My answers to the above said issues are as

under:

1) Issue No. 1 : In the negative.

2) Issue No. 2 : Partly in the affirmative &

Partly in the negative.

3) Issue No. 3 : In the negative.

4) Issue No. 4 : In the negative.

5) Issue No. 5 & 6: As per final order.

I have heard the oral argument of the Workperson represented by Ld. Adv. Shri Gauthankar as well as Ld. Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat representing the Employer.

disorderly behaviour during working hours at the establishment or acts subversive of discipline as well as --------- which of any law applicable to the establishment, the remaining charges of willful insubordination or disobedience or any lawful of reasonable order of the superior and refusal to accept any order or notice communicated in writing have been proved to the satisfaction of this court by acceptable evidence. He submitted that M/s. V. S. Dempo Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vide its letter dated 3-4-2014 (Exb. 20) informed her that they do not required her services to work as Receptionist/ /EPABX Board counter and advised her to report back to the Employer for her placement and taking instructions regarding her work with immediate effect. He submitted that by her letter dated 8-4-2014, she wrote the Chairman of the Employer to allow her to be on the fourth floor as a Receptionist. He submitted that vide letter dated 10-4-2014, the Employer informed the Workperson that she had failed to make compliance is reporting the duty as directed and finally directed to report for duty at dispatch Section of the Employer with immediate effect failing which necessary disciplinary action will be taken against her. He submitted that action of the Employer is dismissing the services of the Workperson amounts to victimization and unfair labour practice. He submitted that the action of the Employer in terminating her services vide letter dated 30-9-2015 (Exb. 36) was by way of discharge from their services with immediate effect. He submitted that the punishment of discharging from services imposed upon the Workperson is too severe and highly disproportionate to the proved misconduct. He submitted that the Workperson is unemployed from the date of termination of her services till date. He submitted that an Award be passed by setting aside impugned order dated 30-9-2015 by which services of the Workperson have been discharge and reinstate the Workperson with full back wages and consequential benefits thereof. In support of his oral contention, he relied upon a judgment in the case of Shri Sheo Shankar Ram V/s. Presiding Officer, Labour Court of Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand reported in 2005 (3 JCR 241). He also relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hind Construction and Engineering V/s their workmen reported in 1965 AIR 917.

19. Ld. Adv. Shri Gauthankar appearing for the Workperson submitted that by order dated 06-06-2023 passed in the findings on the preliminary issues No. 1 and No. 2 this Hon'ble Court held that a free fair and proper inquiry conducted against the Workperson in respect of charge-sheet dated 20-2-2015 in accordance with the principles of natural justice and that except the charge of

20. Per contra, Ld. Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat representing the Employer, during the course of his oral submissions, submitted that the Workperson was appointed by the Employer as a Stenographer vide letter of appointment dated 29-4-1995 and confirmed in the their services vide letter dated 6-2-1996. He1097 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 (Exb. 74-Cross). He submitted that the Workperson was issued a warning letter dated 1-3-2000 (Exb. 75- Cross) to her show cause notice dated 22-2-2000 and her explanation dated 23-2-2000 thereto. He submitted that taking into consideration the past service record of the Workperson, the punishment awarded to her is just, legal and bonafide. In support of his oral submissions, he relied upon three judgments of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay one in the case of Shivaji A. More V/s State Manager, Maharashtra reported in 1996 (72) FLR 447, second of Sarabhai M Chemicals V/s. M. S. Ajmere and anr. reported in 1980 (40) FLR 439 and thirdly in the case of Thermex Ltd., Pune V/s. Vishwanath M. Jadhav and ors. reported in 2009 I CLR 870. He also relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Pearlite liners Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Manorama Sirsi, reported in 2004 II CLR 985. He submitted that though the Workperson in her Affidavit stated that she made various efforts to get gainful employment but she was unable to get, has not produced any such application made to any establishment for job in support of her statement.

I have carefully perused the entire records of the represent the case. I have also carefully considered the submissions advanced before me.

REASONS

21. Issue No. 1: Vide Order dated 6-6-2023 passed in my finding on the Preliminary Issue No. 1 & No. 2, I have discussed and come to the conclusion that a free, fair and proper enquiry has been conducted against the Workperson in consonance with the principles of natural justice. The Issue No. 1 is therefore answered in the Negative.

22. Issue No. 2: Vide Order dated 6-6-2023 passed in my finding on the Preliminary Issue No. 1 and 2, I have discussed and come to the conclusion that except the charge of disorderly behavior during working hours at the establishment or acts subversive of discipline as well as ——-- which of any law applicable to the establishment, the remaining charges or willful insubordination or disobedience or any lawful of reasonable order of the superior and refusal to accept any order or notice communicated in writing have been proved to the satisfaction of this court by acceptable evidence. The Issue No. 2 is therefore answered partly in the affirmative and partly in the negative.

23. Issue No. 3 and 4: I decide the Issue No. 3 and 4 simultaneously as the both the said issues are co-related to each other.

It appears from the pleadings filed by the Workperson on record that the Workperson submitted that the Employer changed the designation of the Workperson from Stenographer to Sr. Receptionist-cum-Sr. Clerk-II. He submitted that by order dated 06-06-2023 passed in the findings on the preliminary issues No. 1 and No. 2, this Hon'ble Court held that a free fair and proper inquiry conducted against the Workperson in respect of charge-sheet dated 20-2-2015 in accordance with the principles of natural justice and that except the charge of disorderly behaviour during working hours at the establishment or acts subversive of discipline as well a----------- which of any law applicable to the establishment, the remaining charges of willful insubordination or disobedience or any lawful of reasonable order of the superior and refusal to accept any order or notice communicated in writing have been proved to the satisfaction of this court by acceptable evidence. He submitted that besides the aforesaid misconduct, the past services of the Workperson is blameworthy. He submitted that the Workperson was issued a letter dt. 24-1-2015 (Exb. 60-Cross), by the Employer. However, the Workperson refused to accept the said letter. He submitted that by show cause notice dated 12-8-2022 (Exb. 54-Cross), the Employer had issued a show cause notice to the Workperson alleging that forty Equity Share Certificate was found in her drawer which was supposed to be handed over. He submitted that vide letter dated 13-8-2002 (Exb. 55-Cross) she replied to the Employer that she accepted her negligence and requested for apology and further requested not to take any disciplinary action against her. He submitted that vide letter dated 7-11-2002 (Exb. 56-Cross), the Employer informed the Workperson that she was found guilty in the inquiry held against her in the charge-sheet dated 26-8-2002 and that considering the gravity of misconduct committed by her, the Employer was justified in taking strict action against her including the extreme punishment of dismissal from the services and that since she had admitted her mistake and assured that she would not repeat the same in future and tendered and unconditional apology, that it has been decided to give her a last and final opportunity and to award her a lesser punishment that of her dismissal by way of stern warning. He submitted that vide letter dated 29-5-1998 (Exb. 72-Cross), the Employer had issued a cautioned letter for her negligent. He submitted that vide letter dated 22-2-2000 (Exb. 73-Cross), the Workperson was issued a show cause notice for the incident of 16-2-2000 against her. He submitted that the Workperson replied to the said show cause notice dt. 22-2-2000, vide her reply dated 23-2-20001098 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 challenged her order of discharge dated 30-9-2015 mainly on the ground of fairness of the inquiry, proving the charges of the misconduct, victimization, unfair labour practice and the punishment imposed upon her is too severe and highly disproportionate.

24. I have already come to the conclusion that a free, fair and proper enquiry has been conducted against the Workperson in consonance with the principles of natural justice and that except the charge of disorderly behavior during working hours at the establishment or acts subversive of discipline as well as ——— which of any law applicable to the establishment, the remaining charges of willful insubordination or disobedience or any lawful of reasonable order of the superior and refusal to accept any order or notice communicated in writing have been proved to the satisfaction of this court by acceptable evidence.

25. The Workperson pleaded that her discharge from service amounts to victimization and unfair labour practice.

Unfair labour practice has been defined under

the V schedule of the I. D. Act, 1947.

5. To discharge or dismiss workmen—

(a) by way of victimization;

(b) not in good faith, but in the colourable

exercise of the employer's rights;

(c) by falsely implicating a workman in a criminal case on false evidence or on concocted evidence;

(d) for patently false reasons;

(e) on untrue or trumped up allegation of

absence without leave;

(f) in utter disregard of the principles of natural justice in the conduct of domestic enquiry or with undue hast;

(g) for misconduct of a minor or technical character, without having any regard to the nature of the particular misconduct or the past record or service of the workman, thereby leading to a disproportionate punishment.

6. ——————————————————

7. To transfer a workmen malafide from one place to another, under the guise of following management policy.

26. The burden to prove the Issue No. 3 and 4 is on the Workperson. However the Workperson has failed to produce on record any material evidence to show her discharge from service which amounts to victimization and unfair labour practice. Even otherwise, the Workperson was appointed as a Stenographer on 29-04-1995 and confirmed in service on 06-02-1996. Thereafter vide letter dated 23-3-2001 the Employer while revising her salary and her designation was changed to Sr. Receptionist to Sr. Clerk II. The Workperson admitted that she was issued a show cause notice dated 12-8-2002 for act of misplacing the share certificates entrusted to her for inward mail and that she had admitted the misplacement of the share certificates in her reply dated 13-8-2002 to the said show cause notice. She admitted that she was issued a warning letter dated 7-11-2002 after conducting a departmental inquiry. She admitted that the Employer had issued to her letter dated 30-1-2015 giving her a last time final opportunity to attend office work at mail section. Thus, the evidence on record clearly indicates that the past service of the Workperson was blame worthy and not clean. Hence, it is held that the discharge of services on the proved misconduct of in subordination and disobedience, cannot be called as by way of victimization or on account of her transfer etc. and as such it is held that the discharge of services of Workperson does not amounts to victimization as well as unfair labour practice.

27. The Workperson lastly pleaded that the punishment of discharge from service awarded to her is too severe and highly disproportionate. It is settled rule that the award of punishment for misconduct is a matter for the management to decide and if there is any justification for the punishment imposed, the Tribunal should not interfere where the punishment is so disproportionate that no reasonable employer would ever have imposed it in like circumstances, the Tribunal may treat the imposition of such punishment as itself showing victimization or unfair labour practice.

28. Ld. Adv. Shri R. Gauthankar appearing for the workman during the course of his oral arguments submitted that the permission awarded to the Workperson amounts to victimization and unfair labour practice and relied upon the following two judgments.

29. In the case of Hind Construction and

Engineering (Supra), The Hon'ble Apex Court,

"No reasonable Employer would have imposed the punishment of dismissal on its entire permanent staff in similar circumstances. Their punishment was severe and out of proportion to the fault and therefore the interference by the Tribunal was justified."1099 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 The principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in aforesaid case is not applicable to the case in hand as the facts of the case in hand are totally different than the case before the Hon'ble Apex Court.

30. In the case of Workman Shri Sheo Shankar Ram (Supra), the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkand has held as under,

"The disciplinary authority while imposing the punishment has not taken into consideration all aspects of the matter including the past conduct of the delinquent and the existence of aggravating circumstances. It is come in the inquiry report that the petitioner-delinquent earlier met with an accident while charging battery because of non- availability of tools. It is also come in the evidence that for procuring the tools Mr. P. K. Sarbadhikary along with the petitioner went to Ranchi for local procurement of tools which were not available. It is also come in the evidence as it appears from the inquiry report that the petitioner-delinquent earlier never refused to do the work or never subjected to an act of insubordination. Taking into consideration all the facts, I am of the opinion that the punishment imposed upon the petitioner by way of dismissal from the service is very harsh and disproportionate to the charge levelled against him. For a charge of not obeying the order of the superior for charging battery on plausible ground the workman should not be removed from the service by way of dismissal.

The principle laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkand in aforesaid case is not applicable to the case in hand as the facts of the case in hand are totally different than the case before the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkand.

31. Ld. Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat representing the Employer during the course of his oral submissions relied upon the following judgments in support of his contention that the punishment awarded to the Workperson is just, legal and bonafide.

32. In the case of Thermax Ltd., Pune (Supra) the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay after referring to the law laid down by the DB in Sarabhai M. Chemicals 1980(49) FLR 439=1980 I LLJ 295(Supra) has in para 6, after quoting the relevant paras 17 & 18 of the said judgement, ruled as under:-

"The ratio of the decision in the above case fortifies the conclusion that proved misconducts of the workmen which constitutes a disobedience of the lawful orders given by his superior constitutes a misconduct punishable under Clause 24(a) and (1) of the model S. O. and that the punishment of dismissal imposed on that count cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate under item (1)(g) of Schedule IV."

33. In the case of Shivaji A. More (Supra), the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has held as under:

"4…………………………….. by now it is well settled that in matter of transfer, the employee who has been served with the transfer order must first report to the place where he is transferred and thereafter make a representation or take out legal proceedings there-against. The inconveniences arising from transfer have been held by the Supreme Court to be 'normal incidents' of service, not justifying interference with transfer orders ………….."

34. In the case of Sarabhai M. Chemicals (Supra), the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay held as under:

"A stenographer is an essential part of any commercial or administrative office. If lawful orders are disobeyed by him, it is not necessary to measure in terms of money the loss that may be caused or the inconvenience that may be caused in order to decide whether he should be punished in the course of departmental enquiry or not. The very fact that a responsible employee like a stenographer indulges in deliberate disobedience of lawful orders, in our view, in sufficient to warrant a punishment of dismissal."

35. In the case of Pearlite Liners P. Ltd. (Supra),

the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:

"……………………………The plaintiff has not complied with the transfer order as she never reported for work at the place where she was transferred……………………… In case of such insubordination, termination of service would be a possibility. Such a decision purely rests within the discretion of the management ……………………… An employer cannot be forced to take an employee with whom relations have reached a point of complete loss of faith between the two."

The principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in its respective aforesaid cases are well recognized and also applicable to the case in hand. Among the aforesaid cases the principle laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Sarabhai M. Chemicals is exactly applicable to the case in hand.

36. In the case in hand the Workperson was working as stenographer which was subsequently1100 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 designated as Sr. Receptionist to Sr. Clerk-II. The services of the Workperson was transferred to at the 4th floor for M/s V. S. Dempo Holdings Ltd. The Workperson was issued a letter dated 3-4-2014 which she refused to accept the said letter. The Workperson was relieved on 3-4-2014 to report to the Employer on 4-4-2014. The Workperson accordingly reported to Mr. Shirodkar for placement. The Workperson was offered a letter dated 24-1-2015 informing her that she has to attend work for mail section on the ground floor office. The Workperson refused to accept the said letter and did not give any heed to the instructions and advise and also did not report to the mail section and remained idle without doing work till close of working hours thereby disobeyed the reasonable and lawful order of the superior. The Workperson alleged that she was scared to join in the mail section on the ground floor as earlier there was death of one of the employee due to heart attack. The said defence of the Workperson is incorrect and illogical taking into consideration the seriousness of the misconduct, past record of the Workperson as well as existence of the mitigating circumstances, the punishment of discharge from service issued to the Workperson is just, legal and proper, and this court shall not interfere with the same. It is held that the action of Employer in dismissing the services of the Workperson w.e.f. 30-9-2015 is just, legal and proper.

In view of above it is held that the Workperson failed to prove that the action of the management of the Employer in dismissing her services w.e.f. 30-9-2015 is illegal and unjustified. It is further held that the Workperson failed to prove that the action of the Employer in dismissing her services w.e.f. 30-9-2015 amounts to unfair Labour practice and victimization. The Issue No. 3 and 4 are therefore answered in the negative.

37. Issue No. 5: While deciding the Issue No. 3 herein above I have discussed and come to the conclusion that the action of the Employer in dismissing the services of the Workperson is just, legal and proper. So also while deciding the Issue No. 4 hereinabove I have discussed and come to the conclusion that the Workperson failed to prove that the action of the Employer in dismissing her services amounts to unfair Labour practice and victimization. The Workperson is therefore is not entitled to any relief. The Issue No. 5 is therefore answered in the negative.

In view of the above, I proceed to pass the

following Order:-

ORDER

1. It is held that the action of the management of M/s. Goa Carbon Limited, Campal, Panaji, Goa, in dismissing the service of Mrs. Rupa U. Naik Madkaikar, Sr. Receptionist-cum-Sr. Clerk-II, w.e.f. 30-09-2015, is legal and justified.

2. It is held that the Workperson Mrs. Rupa U.

Naik Madkaikar, is not entitled to any relief.

Inform the Government accordingly.

Sd/- (Suresh Narulkar) Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II.

——————

Department of Law & Judiciary

Law (Establishment) Division

–––

Order

No. 1/6/2014-LD (Estt.)/Part/245

Government of Goa is pleased to accept the resignation tendered by Adv. Sandra Vaz e Correia, as Government Counsel on the panel of Government Advocates, for defending the interest of the Government in the matters allotted to her by the Law Department (Estt.), Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa before District Court (South Goa) as well as all Courts (South Goa) with immediate effect.

Adv. Sandra Vaz e Correia shall return all the briefs pending with her if any, to the concerned Department under intimation to this Department.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amir Y. Parab, Under Secretary (Law-Estt.).

Porvorim, 29th January, 2024.

———— Order

No. 1/7/2014-LD (Estt.)/252

Read: Orde r N o . 1 / 7 / 2 014-L D(Estt.)/1250

dated 04-07-2019.

The Government of Goa is pleased to detach Adv.

Maria Simone Judith Correia, Additional

Government Advocate who was attaced to the

office of the Ld. Advocate General to appear and

defend the interest of the Government in the matters

before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay at Goa,

Panaji due to tremendous workload with immediate

effect.

She will appear in those matters, which would

be allotted to her by the Ld. Advocate General and

perform all duties and functions as may be assigned

by the Ld. Advocate General or the State

Government.

She shall be paid fees as per the existing terms

and conditions laid down by the Government vide

Order No. 1/19/2015/LD(Estt.)/1515 dated

05-09-2023, as applicable to Government Advocates/

/Additional Government Advocates and as amended

from time to time. On submission of bills (in

duplicate) alongwith the attendence certificate,

issued by the Registrar of the High Court of Bombay,

Panaji-Goa. She shall comply with the instructions

contained in the Government Circular No. 4-43-99/

LD dated 04-05-2000.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amir Y. Parab, Under Secretary (Law-Estt.).

Porvorim, 31st January, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 14-17-2022-LD (Estt.)/258

The Notification No. Rule/P.1616/Notn.-01/2024

dated 06-01-2024 which have been issued by the

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Appellate Side,

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, 01st February, 2024.

–––

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE

–––

Notification

No. Rule/P.1616/Notn.-01/2024

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.1616/2023 dated 27th December, 2023 regarding constitution of "The Gender Sensitization Internal Complaints Committee" to deal with the complaints if any, of Sexual Harassment of any woman at workplace, 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 workplace The Gender Sensitization Internal Complaints Committee

1

2

High Court of Bombay 1. Hon'ble Smt. Justice at Goa Anuja Prabhudessai,

Presiding Officer.

2. Hon'ble Shri Justice B. P. Deshpande, Member.

3. Smt. Anarkali Agni, Senior Advocate, Member.

4. Ms. Vijaya V. Ambre,

Member Secretary, GSLSA, 'Member Secretary'.

5. Ms. Niti Haldankar, Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Judge, Member.

6. Ms. Susan Linahres,

Advocate, Member.

7. Mrs. Norma Alvares,

Advocate, Member.

8. Mrs. Geeta P. Naik, Assistant, High Court of Bombay at Goa, Member.

High Court of Judicature R. N. Joshi, at Bombay. Registrar General. Dated, 06th January, 2024.

——————

High Court of Judicature Appellate Side, Bombay –– Notification

No. A-3924/G/2024/347

Sub.: Grant of First Assured Career Progression Scale (A.C.P.-I) to the Judicial Officers in the Cadre of Civil Judges, Junior Division as per the recommendations of the Honourable Shetty Commission, the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court in All India Judges' Association V/s. Union of India and Others [Writ Petition No. (C) 643/2015] and revised pay scale as per recommendations of the Honourable Reddy Commission.

High Court is pleased to confer the First Assured Career Progression Scale i.e. Rs. 92,960 — up to next level of pay on the following Judicial Officers in the cadre of Civil Judge, Junior Division w.e.f. the dates shown against their respective names. Accordingly the concerned Head of the Departments shall refix the pay of these Officers in accordance with the Order No. 8/44/97-Fin (R & C)-FPC/Part IV dated 8th May, 2003 issued by the Government of Goa in Finance (Rev. & Cont.) Department and other relevant orders/circulars/ /judgments.

Sr. Name of the Judicial Date of Date of Present No. Officers appointment conferment posting

in cadre of A.C.P.-I

1               2                         3               4                      5
1.  Ms. Manisha Mangaldas Shet        07-09-2016    22-10-2021  Ad hoc  CJSD &  JMFC, Panaji,
    Parkar  @  Manisha  Shailesh                                North Goa.
    Narvekar
2.  Ms. Suman  Chandrakant  Gad       20-12-2016    20-12-2021  CJJD &  JMFC, Panaji, North  Goa.
3.  Ms. Nilima  Shrikant Kankonkar    20-12-2016    20-12-2021  CJJD & JMFC, Mapusa, North Goa.
4.  Shri  Jude  Torex  Sequeira       20-12-2016    20-12-2021  CJJD & JMFC, Mapusa, North Goa.
5.  Ms. Teisy Mascarenhas             05-12-2018    19-12-2023  CJJD & JMFC, Margao, South Goa.
6.  Ms. Akshata Anand Kale            05-12-2018    05-12-2023  CJJD & JMFC, Bicholim, North Goa.
7.  Ms. Purva Vishnudas Naik          05-12-2018    13-12-2023  CJJD & JMFC, Panaji, North Goa.
8.  Ms. Anusha Digamber Kaisukar      05-12-2018    05-12-2023  CJJD & JMFC, Sanguem, South Goa.
9.  Ms. Pooja Shirish Desai           05-12-2018    05-12-2023  CJJD & JMFC, Vasco-da-Gama, South Goa.

High Court, Bombay.

Dated, 24th January, 2024.

R. N. Joshi,

Registrar General.

——————

Department of Personnel

–––

Order

No. 13/15/2023-PER/353

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/15/2023-PER/3237 dated 31-07-2023 had granted extension in service to Shri Dayanand Nadkarni, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-01-2024, in public interest subject to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;

And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted vigilance clearance stating that, no disciplinary proceedings/vigilance cases are pending or being contemplated against Shri Dayanand Nadkarni;

And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400095999 dated 02-12-2023, concurred the proposal for grant of extension in service to Shri Dayanand Nadkarni, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;

And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXXVIIIth meeting held on 10-01-2024 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service to Shri Dayanand Nadkarni, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-01-2024, in public interest;

Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/15/2023-PER/3237 dated 31-07-2023 granting extension in service to Shri Dayanand Nadkarni, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-01-2024, in public interest.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

Order

No. 22/19/2019-PER/356

Read: Order No. 22/1/2013-PER/Part/2122 dated

23-09-2020.

In terms of Rule 15 of the Goa Police Service Rules, 1997 and on the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/12/37(1)/2015/521 dated 12-01-2024, the Governor of Goa is pleased to declare the following Junior Scale Officers (Deputy Superintendent of Police) of Goa Police Service, to have satisfactorily completed their period of probation in Junior Scale of Goa Police Service and confirm them in the said grade with effect from the date of their completion of probation period:-

Sr. Name of the Date of completion No. Officers of probation period

1. Shri Prabodh B. Shirwaikar 22-09-2022

2. Shri Harishchandra V. 22-09-2022

Madkaikar

3. Shri Santosh S. Desai 22-09-2022

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

————

Order

No. 13/14/2023-PER/363

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/14/2023- -PER/3236 dated 31-07-2023 had granted extension in service to Shri Abhay Prabhu, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-07-2024, in public interest subject to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;

And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted vigilance clearance stating that, no disciplinary proceedings/vigilance cases are pending or being contemplated against Shri Abhay Prabhu;

And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400095812 dated 25-11-2023, concurred the proposal for grant of extension in service to Shri Abhay Prabhu, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;

And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXXVIIIth meeting held on 10-01-2024 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service to Shri Abhay Prabhu, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-07-2024, in public interest;

Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/14/2023-PER/3236 dated 31-07-2023 granting extension in service to Shri Abhay Prabhu, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-07-2024, in public interest.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

————

Order

No. 13/17/2023-PER/366

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/17/2023- -PER dated 31-08-2023 had granted extension in service to Shri Merwyn Calderia, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-09-2023 to 31-08-2024, in public interest subject to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;

And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted vigilance clearance stating that, no disciplinary proceedings/vigilance cases are pending or being contemplated against Shri Merwyn Caldeira;

And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400095814 dated 25-11-2023, concurred the proposal for grant of extension in service to Shri Merwyn Caldeira, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;

And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXXVIIIth meeting held on 10-01-2024 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service to Shri Merwyn Caldeira, Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-09-2023 to 31-08-2024, in public interest;

Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/17/2023-PER/3534 dated 31-08-2023 granting extension in service to Shri Merwyn Caldeira, Assistant Engineer, Water1104 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-09-2023 to 31-08-2024, in public interest.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

————

Order

No. 13/13/2023-PER/367

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/13/2023-

-PER/3235 dated 31-07-2023 had granted extension

in service to Shri Nazareth Vaz, Executive Engineer,

Water Resources Department beyond the date of his

superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f.

01-08-2023 to 31-07-2024, in public interest subject

to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance

Department and approval of Council of Ministers;

And whereas, the Vigilance Department has

submitted vigilance clearance stating that, no

disciplinary proceedings/vigilance cases are

pending or being contemplated against

Shri Nazareth Vaz;

And whereas, the Finance Department vide its

U.O. No. 1400095813 dated 25-11-2023, concurred

the proposal for grant of extension in service to Shri

Nazareth Vaz, Executive Engineer, Water Resources

Department subject to Cabinet approval and

adherence of all Rules in force;

And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its

XXXVIIIth meeting held on 10-01-2024 resolved to

grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service

to Shri Nazareth Vaz, Executive Engineer, Water

Resources Department beyond the date of his

superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f.

01-08-2023 to 31-07-2024, in public interest;

Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/13/2023-PER/3235 dated 31-07-2023 granting extension in service to Shri Nazareth Vaz, Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-08-2023 to 31-07-2024, in public interest.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

Order

No. 13/15/2023-PER/372

The Governor of Goa is pleased to grant further

extension in service to Shri Dayanand Nadkarni,

Executive Engineer, Public Works Department beyond

the date of his superannuation for a period of six

months w.e.f. 01-02-2024 to 31-07-2024, in public

interest. This order is subject to concurrence of

Finance Department and approval of Council of

Ministers.

The extension is further subject to termination

without assigning any reasons during the period of

extension.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 31st January, 2024.

—–––––—

Order

No. 13/01/2024-PER/374

The Governor of Goa is pleased to grant extension

in service to Shri A. J. George Pereira, Chief Engineer,

Public Works Department beyond the date of his

superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f.

01-02-2024 to 31-07-2024, in public interest. This

order is subject to vigilance clearance from Vigilance

Department, concurrence of Finance Department

and approval of Council of Ministers.

The extension is further subject to termination

without assigning any reasons during the period of

extension.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 31st January, 2024.

————

Order

No. 13/03/2023-PER/375

The Governor of Goa is pleased to grant further

extension in service to Shri Santosh Mhapne, Chief

Engineer, Public Works Department beyond the date1105 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 of his superannuation for a period of six months w.e.f. 01-02-2024 to 31-07-2024, in public interest. This order is subject to vigilance clearance from Vigilance Department, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers.

The extension is further subject to termination without assigning any reasons during the period of extension.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 31st January, 2024.

————

Order

No. 15/2/2020-PER/376

On the recommendations of Goa Services Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order the transfer and posting of the following Officers in the cadre of Mamlatdar/Joint Mamlatdar/Vigilance Officer, in public interest, with immediate effect:

Sr. No. Name Present posting Posted as 1 2

3

4

1. Shri Anant Malik Mamlatdar, Pernem with Mamlatdar, Tiswadi.

additional charge of Chief

Officer, Pernem Municipal

Council

2. Shri  Jeetendra  Bugde              Joint Mamlatdar-I, Bardez        Joint Mamlatdar-I, Tiswadi.
3. Kum.  Shannon  Almeida              Jt. Mamlatdar-III, Salcete       Joint Mamlatdar-II,  Tiswadi.
4. Shri  Dhiren  Banavalikar           Joint Mamlatdar-III, Bardez      Mamlatdar, Bardez.
5. Shri  Shripad  Majik                Joint Mamlatdar-II, Bicholim     Joint Mamlatdar-I, Bardez.

with additional charge

of Joint Mamlatdar-III,

Bicholim

 6. Smt.  Jennifer  Fernandes            Joint Mamlatdar-II,  Ponda      Joint Mamlatdar-II, Bardez.
 7. Smt. Sanjivani Satardekar            Joint Mamlatdar-II, Tiswadi     Joint Mamlatdar-III, Bardez.
 8. Smt. Shama Arondekar                 Joint Mamlatdar-IV, Salcete     Joint Mamlatdar-V, Bardez.
 9. Shri  Ranjeet  Salgaonkar            Joint Mamlatdar-I, Tiswadi      Joint Mamlatdar-VI, Bardez.
10.  Shri Kaushik Dessai                 Mamlatdar, Tiswadi              Mamlatdar, Pernem.
11.  Shri Ramkrishna Salgaonkar          Awaiting  posting               Joint Mamlatdar-II,
                                                                         Pernem  with  additional
                                                                         charge of Joint Mamlatdar-III,
                                                                         Pernem.
12.  Shri  Pravind  Gawas                Mamlatdar, Bardez               Mamlatdar, Bicholim.
13.  Shri  Shailendra  Dessai            Joint Mamlatdar-V,  Bardez      Joint Mamlatdar-II, Bicholim.
14.  Shri  Laximikant  Dessai            Mamlatdar, Salcete              Mamlatdar, Ponda.
15.  Shri Rajesh Sakhalkar               Mamlatdar, Ponda                Joint Mamlatdar-II, Ponda.
16.  Shri  Bhiku Gawas                   Joint Mamlatdar-II, Bardez      Mamlatdar, Salcete.
17.  Ms. Gayatri Naik Dessai             Awaiting  posting               Joint Mamlatdar-III, Salcete.
18.  Shri  Saiesh  Naik                  Joint Mamlatdar-VI, Bardez      Joint Mamlatdar-IV, Salcete.

1 2

3

4

19. Kum. Dayle Rebello Joint Mamlatdar-I, Quepem Joint Mamlatdar-I, Mormugao.

with additional charge of

Joint Mamlatdar-II, Quepem

20. Ms. Urvashi Naik Awaiting posting Joint Mamlatdar-I, Canacona.

21. Shri Nathan Afonso Joint Mamlatdar-I, Mormugao Joint Mamlatdar-I, Quepem.

22. Shri Surendra Gaonkar Awaiting posting Joint Mamlatdar-II, Quepem.

Shri Shubham Bhartu, BDO, Pernem shall hold the charge of Chief Officer, Pernem Municipal Council, in addition to his own duties.

Shri Paritosh Dessai, BDO, Sanguem shall hold the charge of Chief Officer, Sanguem Municipal Council, in addition to his own duties.

Shri Suryajirao Rane, BDO, Sattari shall hold the charge of Chief Officer, Valpoi Municipal Council, in addition to his own duties.

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.

Eshant V. Sawant, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim, 31st January, 2024.

————

O rd er

No. 6/5/2023-PER/409

On the recommendation of the Goa Services Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order the transfer and posting of the following Officers of Goa Civil Service, in public interest, with immediate effect:-

Sr. No. Name and present posting of the Officer

Posted as

1. Shri Brijesh Manerkar, Managing Director, Director of Municipal Administration Goa Human Resource Development Corporation with additional charge of Member

Secretary, Goa State Urban Development Agency.

Shri Meghanath Porob, Additional Secretary (ARD) holding additional charge of Additional Secretary (Housing) shall also hold charge of the post of Managing Director, Goa Human Resource Development Corporation, in addition to his own duties.

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.

Eshant V. Sawant, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim, 2nd February, 2024.

————

Order

No. 7/8/2016-PER/411

In exercise of the powers conferred by Article 316 (1-A) of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Goa is pleased to give charge of the Chairman, Goa Public Service Commission to Dr. Udaysinh Shrikant Raorane, Member of the Goa Public Service Commission, during the earned leave of Shri Carminho Jose Manuel do Rosario de Noronha, Chairman, Goa Public Service Commission for the period from 23-01-2024 to 22-02-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 02nd February, 2024.

Order

No. 13/10/2023-PER/422

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/10/2023- -PER/1630 dated 31-05-2023 had granted further extension in service to Shri Pramod Badami, Chief Engineer (WR), Water Resources Department, beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of 01 year w.e.f. 01-06-2023 to 31-05-2024, in public interest subject to vigilance clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and approval of Council of Ministers;

And whereas, the Vigilance Department has submitted vigilance clearance stating that, no disciplinary proceedings/vigilance cases are pending or being contemplated against Shri Pramod Badami;

And whereas, the Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 1400096331 dated 31-12-2023, concurred the proposal for grant of further extension in service to Shri Pramod Badami, Chief Engineer (WR), Water Resources Department subject to Cabinet approval and adherence of all Rules in force;

And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXXIXth meeting held on 24-01-2024 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for extension in service to Shri Pramod Badami, Chief Engineer (WR), Water Resources Department, beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of 01 year w.e.f. 01-06-2023 to 31-05-2024, in public interest;

Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to confirm the Order No. 13/10/2023-PER/1630 dated 31-05-2023 granting extension in service to Shri Pramod Badami, Chief Engineer (WR), Water Resources Department, beyond the date of his superannuation for a period of 01 year w.e.f. 01-06-2023 to 31-05-2024, in public interest.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 02nd February, 2024.

————

Order

No. 13/09/2023-PER/424

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 13/09/2023- -PER/3741 dated 27-09-2023 had granted extension in service to Dr. Sushila Mendes, Professor in History, Government College of Arts, Science and Commerce, Quepem beyond the date of her superannuation for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-05-2023 to 30-04-2024, in public interest;

And whereas, the Directorate of Higher Education vide Order No. ACAD III/GC-04/PER/SSM/70/ 2023/10655 dated 13-12-2023 had curtailed the extension in service granted to Dr. Sushila Mendes, Professor in History, Government College of Arts, Science and Commerce, Quepem with effect from 14-12-2023 (a.n.).

And whereas, the Council of Ministers in its XXXIXth meeting held on 24-01-2024 resolved to grant ex-post facto approval for curtailment of extension in service granted to Dr. Sushila Mendes, Professor in History, Government College of Arts, Science and Commerce, Quepem with effect from 14-12-2023 (a.n.).

Now, therefore, the Government is pleased to curtail the extension in service granted to Dr. Sushila Mendes, Professor in History, Government College of Arts, Science and Commerce, Quepem with effect from 14-12-2023 (a.n.).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 2nd February, 2024.

————

O rd er

No. 22/5/2021-PER/440

Read: Order No. 15041/08/2023-UTS.I dated 29-01-2024 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi.

The Governor of Goa is pleased to relieve Smt. Aslam Khan, IPS (AGMUT: 2007), Deputy Inspector General of Police, Goa from the State Administration with effect from 09-02-2024 (a.n.) to join her new posting in Delhi.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avit S. Naik, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim, 5th February, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 7/17/2022-PER/413

Read: 1. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/4036

dated 05-12-2022.

2. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/1100

dated 18-04-2023.

3. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/3388

dated 14-08-2023.

4. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/3687 dated 15-09-2023.

5. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/3821 dated 05-10-2023.

6. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/3912 dated 13-10-2023.

7. Corrigendum No. 7/17/2022-PER/4027 dated 23-10-2023.

8. Notification No. 7/17/2022-PER/4953 dated 06-12-2023.

9. Notification No. 7/27/2022-PER/21 dated 03-01-2024.

In partial modification to the Notifications read in the preamble, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order allocation of work/Departments amongst the following Secretaries to the Government, with immediate effect:-

Sr. No. Name & designation

Departments

1 2

3

1 Dr. V. Candavelou, IAS (1997) 1. Principal Secretary to Chief Minister.

Principal Secretary to Chief Minister 2. Finance.

3. Mines & Geology.

4. Planning & Statistics.

5. DG GIPARD.

2. Shri Sarpreet Singh Gill, IAS (2009) 1. Tribal Welfare.

Secretary (Tribal Welfare) 2. Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services.

3. Fisheries.

4. Official Language.

5. Public Grievances.

6. Ports.

7. River Navigation.

8. Commissioner, State Taxes.

3. Ms. Swetika Sachan, IAS (2014) 1. Industries, Trade & Commerce.

Secretary (Industries, Trade & Commerce) 2. Handicrafts, Textile and Coir.

3. Sports.

4. Art & Culture.

5. CEO, Goa Investment Promotion and

Facilitation Board.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Eshant V. Sawant, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim, 2nd February, 2024.

————

Memorandum

No. 6/15/2017-PER/347

Read: (1) Memorandum No. 6/15/2017-PER/5025 dated 13-12-2022.

(2) Order No. 6/28/2016-PER/673 dated 10-03-2023.

(3) Order No. 6/28/2016-PER/1376 dated 09-05-2023.

The seniority of the Senior Administrative Grade Officers of Goa Civil Service was last finalized vide Memorandum dated 13-12-2022 cited at Sr. No. 1 in the preamble.

Thereafter, some officers have been promoted to Senior Administrative Grade, some officers have retired and the tentative seniority of officers is drawn as follows:

Sr. Name of Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of No. the Officer Birth appointment appointment appointment appointment appointment

in Junior in Senior in JAG in Selection in Senior

Scale Scale Grade Administrative

Grade

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Arlenkar

1. Shri Vinesh 07-10-1965 09-01-1998 29-07-2005 03-11-2010 12-08-2011 16-12-2016 vide order dated 25-04-2022

2. Shri Vijay M. 29-07-1965 12-09-2006 17-11-2008 03-11-2010 12-08-2011 16-12-2016 Paranjape

3. Shri Amarsen 12-04-1968 17-04-2003 17-11-2008 03-11-2010 12-08-2011 12-05-2021 Rane

4. Shri Levinson 30-09-1966 05-08-2004 17-11-2008 03-11-2010 03-04-2017 12-05-2021 J. Martins

5. Shri Sunil 01-03-1967 14-08-2002 17-11-2008 03-11-2010 03-04-2017 12-05-2021 P. Masurkar

6. Shri Gopal 04-02-1965 22-06-1999 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 Parsekar vide order vide order vide order

dated dated dated 25-11-2019 17-09-2021 06-04-2022

7. Shri Gurudas P. 06-11-1964 11-04-2003 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 Pilarnekar

8. Smt. Shabari 09-12-1964 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 Manjrekar @ Ruhi Redkar

9. Shri Meghanath 13-05-1968 11-04-2003 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 P. Porob

vide order dated

10-04-2017

10. Shri Venancio 18-05-1966 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 Furtado

11. Shri Derrick P. 19-03-1967 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 Neto

12. Shri Srinet 13-05-1979 25-07-2003 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 21-09-2020 10-03-2023 N. Kotwale

vide order

dated

10-04-2017

13. Shri  Dipak     16-02-1968    12-09-2006     09-12-2016   23-10-2018     17-12-2020   09-05-2023
    Desai                                        vide  order  vide  order
                                                 dated        dated
                                                 23-01-2019   14-06-2019
14. Shri V. P.      27-09-1973    12-09-2006     09-12-2016   23-10-2018     17-12-2020   09-05-2023
    Dangi
15. Shri  Dipak     12-03-1967    12-09-2006     09-12-2016   23-10-2018     17-12-2020   09-05-2023
    M. Bandekar
16. Shri Vikas S.   21-08-1967    12-09-2006     09-12-2016   23-10-2018     17-12-2020   09-05-2023
    N. Gaunekar
17. Smt. Deepali    18-07-1968    12-09-2006     09-12-2016   23-10-2018     17-12-2020   09-05-2023
    D. Naik

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

18. Shri Raju V. 25-12-1969 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 Gawas

19. Shri Anthony 08-01-1973 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 J. D'Souza

20. Smt. Sandhya 15-07-1965 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2020 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 S. Kamat

21. Shri Damodar 22-03-1967 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2020 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 S. Morajkar

vide order dated 10-04-2017

22. Smt. Laura 28-05-1964 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 Britto e Madre Deus

23. Shri Vassudev 06-09-1971 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 N. Shetye

24. Shri Rajendra 08-11-1964 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 D. Mirajkar

25. Shri R. K. 12-07-1969 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 Satardekar

26. Smt. Upasana 01-07-1971 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 Mazgaonkar

27. Shri Prashant 08-05-1967 12-05-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 Shirodkar

vide order vide order dated dated 23-01-2019 14-06-2019

28. Shri Sanjeev 17-06-1970 12-09-2006 09-12-2016 23-10-2018 17-12-2020 09-05-2023 C. Gauns Dessai

This is subject to the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 9587-9590 & 9591-9594/2016 before Hon'ble Supreme Court against the orders of Writ Petition No. 397/2015, 451/2015, 482/2015 & 663/2015 filed in Hon'ble High Court of Judicature, Goa Bench, Panaji.

The Senior Administrative Grade Officers of Goa Civil Service from serial No. 6 onwards are requested to scrutinize the list and in case they have any objections as regards to seniority assigned to them, they shall intimate in writing to the undersigned on or before 12-02-2024. Objections received thereafter, shall not be entertained.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Eshant V. Sawant, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim, 29th January, 2024.

————

Corrigendum

No. 5/22/2022-PER/434

Read: Order No. 5/22/2022-PER/202 dated 16-01-2024.

The post mentioned against the name of Shri Laximikant Kuttikar at Sr. No. 5 in the order read in the preamble may be substituted and corrected to read as "Deputy Director (Admn.), Technical Education" instead of "Deputy Director (Admn.), O/o DGP".

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Eshant V. Sawant, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim, 1st February, 2024.

Department of Public Health

–––

Order

No. 22/6/98-I/PHD/PF-I/173

Government is pleased to transfer the following Health Officer under Directorate of Health Services, with immediate effect:-

Sr. No. Name of the Doctor Present place of posting Transferred at 1. Dr. Tulsimamta Kakodkar, Primary Health Centre, Balli Primary Health Centre, Health Officer (deployed at Hospicio South Goa Sanguem.

District Hospital, Margao and re-deployed

at Primary Health Centre, Sanguem)

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 29th January, 2024.

———— O rd er

No. 44/28/2017-I/PHD/Part/188

Government is pleased to transfer the following Medical Officer under Directorate of Health Services, with immediate effect:-

Sr. No. Name of the Doctor Present place of posting Transferred at 1 2

3

4

1. Dr. Amita Lotlikar, Primary Health Centre, Sanguem Urban Health Centre, Margao Medical Officer

(against the vacant post of Medical Officer due to promotion by Dr. Benedita Dias).

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

———— Order

No. 47/60/2011-I/PHD/194

Government is pleased to accept resignation tender by Ms. Luana Agnes Mascarenhas to the post of Dietician (Group 'B' Non Gazetted) under the Directorate of Health Services and to relieve her from the post of Dietician under Directorate of Health Services with effect from 26-07-2023 (a.n.).

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 01st February, 2024.

————

O rd er

No. 44/26/2017-I/PHD/200

Government is pleased to deploy the following Doctors under Directorate of Health Services, with immediate effect:-

Sr. Name of Doctor Present place of Deployed at No.

posting as per

Order dated 14-12-2023

1. Dr. Maria J. C. Mascarenhas, Community Health Centre, Bicholim To be deployed at Raj Health Officer

Bhavan Dispensary.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 1st February, 2024.

Order

No. 4/38/2002-II/PHD/353

Read: Order No. 4/38/2002-II/PHD dated 18-01-2016.

Whereas, on the recommendation of the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/11/30(9)/2015/1329 dated 17-12-2015, Dr. Sanjivani Keny, Lecturer in the Department of Respiratory Medicine (earlier TB&CD) was promoted to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Respiratory Medicine (earlier TB&CD) in the Goa Medical College, Bambolim-Goa on officiating basis in the Level-11 of Pay Matrix of 7th Pay Commission [Pay Band-3 Rs. 15600-39100+Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- (pre-revised)] vide Order read at preamble;

And whereas, the recommendation in respect of Dr. Lalita Fernandes was kept in sealed cover in the said DPC;

And whereas, the Directorate of Vigilance has submitted the vigilance clearance in respect of Dr. Lalita Fernandes;

And whereas, the GPSC vide letter No. COM/II/ /11/30(9)/2015/275 dated 17-10-2022, has conveyed the recommendation which was kept in sealed cover and the same has been accepted by the Government; Now therefore, the Government is pleased to promote Dr. Lalita Fernandes, Lecturer to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Respiratory Medicine (earlier TB&CD) in the Goa Medical College, Bambolim-Goa on regular basis in the Level-11 of Pay Matrix of 7th Pay Commission [Pay Band-3 Rs.15600- -39100+Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- (pre-revised)] w.e.f. 18-01-2016 with consequential monetary benefits.

Consequent upon the above promotion, Dr. Sanjivani Keny shall stand reverted to the post of Lecturer in the Department of Respiratory Medicine.

Similarly, Dr. Anita Velingkar, who was promoted to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Respiratory Medicine (earlier TB&CD) in the Goa Medical College, on officiating basis consequent upon promotion of Dr. Sanjivani Keny to the post of Associate Professor in the Department of Respiratory Medicine (earlier TB&CD) on officiating basis, shall also stand reverted to the post of Lecturer in the Department of Respiratory Medicine.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Trupti B. Manerkar, Under Secretary (Health-I).

Porvorim, 01st February, 2024.

————

Addendum

No. 31/11/2004-I/PHD/Part/179

Read: 1. Government Order No. 31/11/2004-I/PHD/Part/2669 dated 26-11-2019.

2. Addendum No. 31/11/2004-I/PHD/Part/59 dated 07-01-2021.

3. Order No. 31/11/2004-I/PHD/Part/196 dated 07-02-2023.

In the Government Order and Addendum read 1, 2 and 3:-

1. Government is pleased to revise the State AEFI Technical Committee and include State

TB Officer/CMO NTEP as the member of the State AEFI Technical Committee and

2. To include Orthopaedician, Dermatologist and General Surgeon as special invitees as & when

necessary in the State AEFI Technical Committee meeting.

The rest of the content remains the same.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 18th January, 2024.

————

Corrigendum

No. 21/10/2001-I/PHD/180

Read: 1. Order No. 221/10/2001-I/PHD/1646 dated 8-12-2023.

2. Corrigendum No. 21/10/2001-I/PHD/1681 dated 12-12-2023.

In the Government Order dated 08-12-2023 referred above, the details shown against Dr. Minaxi

Panandikar, Senior Gynaecologist (Retired) shall be substituted and read as under:-

Name & Designation Date of Present Grade Pay to be Date of

joining Grade Pay made applicable effect

under DACP

1 2 3 4 5

Dr. Minaxi Panandikar, 29-06-2001 G.P.- Rs. 6,600/- in PB-3 G.P.- Rs. 7,600/- in PB-3 21-10-2010 Senior Gynaecologist G.P.- Rs. 7,600/- in PB-3 G.P.- Rs. 8,700/- in PB-4 21-10-2014 (Retired) G.P.- Rs. 8,700/- in PB-4 G.P.- Rs. 10,000/- in PB-4 29-06-2021

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 30th January, 2024.

——————

Department of Public Works

Office of the Principal Chief Engineer –––

Order

No. 40/2/2023-PCE-PWD-ADM(II)/173

Government is pleased to order the transfer of Shri Eduardo J. Pereira, Executive Engineer, Works Division II, PWD, Panaji and post him as Chief General Manager (Engineering) to Smart City Development Ltd., Panaji-Goa on deputation during Mission period with immediate effect in public interest.

The deployment of the above Officer is for the period of one year and shall be governed by the terms and conditions of the Government O.M. No. 13/4/74-PER dated 12-02-1999 and 11-01-2007 as amended from time to time of the Department of Personnel, Secretariat, Porvorim.

Shri Eduardo J. Pereira, Executive Engineer shall continue to hold the additional charge in Tribal

Welfare Department in addition to his own duties until further orders.

Further, Shri Jude A. D. Carvalho, Executive Engineer, Works Division VII, PWD, Panaji shall hold

the additional charge to the post of Executive Engineer, Works Division II, PWD, Panaji in addition

to his own duties until further orders with immediate effect.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

U. P. Parsekar, Principal Chief Engineer (PWD) &

ex officio Addl. Secretary.

Panaji, 31st January, 2024.

Department of Revenue

–––

O rd er

No. 1/1/Calling Attention/2023/118

The Government of Goa is hereby pleased to constitute a Committee to identify landlocked properties and modify the survey maps to reflect existing access to such plots and suggest a solution to mitigate such problems, as under:

1. Chief Town Planner (TCP) — Chairman.

2. Addl. Collector-I (North) — Member.

3. Addl. Collector-I (South) — Member.

4. CEE, Public Works — Member.

Department

5. Director of Panchayat — Member.

6. Director of Municipal — Member.

Administration

7. Director of Settlement — Member

and Land Records Secretary.

This order shall come into force on the date of its

publication in the Official Gazette.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Avelina D'sa E Pereira, Under Secretary (Revenue-I).

Porvorim, 5th February, 2024.

——————

Department of Town & Country Planning –––

Notification

No. 36/18/143/17(2)/Calapur/346/1,2,3&4/TCP/2023/608

Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an application dated 12-04-2023 (hereinafter referred to1114 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 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 4198 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 346, sub-division No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Village Calapur, Tiswadi 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 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 the plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 346, sub-division No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Village Calapur, Tiswadi Taluka admeasuring an area of 4198 m2 which is earmarked as Paddy Field with Irrigation Comand 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 the plot of land admeasuring an area of 4198 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 346, sub-division No. 1, 2,3 and 4 of Village Calapur, Tiswadi Taluka, District North 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 (Administration/

/Planning).

Panaji, 31st January, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 36/18/214/17(2)/Marra/86/3&3-A/TCP/2023/613

Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an application dated 04-08-2023 (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 1350 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 86, sub-division No. 3 & 3-A of Village Marra, 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 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. 86, sub- -division No. 3 & 3-A of Village Marra, Bardez Taluka admeasuring an area of 1075 m2 which is earmarked as Orchard Zone 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 1075 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 86, sub-division No. 3 & 3-A, of Village Marra, Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa which is earmarked as Orchard Zone as per RPG- 2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.

Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Administration/

/Planning).

Panaji, 31st January, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 36/18/210/17(2)/Guirim/5/1/TCP-2024/627

Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an application dated 14-12-2023 (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 as1115 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 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 2625 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 5, sub-division No. 1, of Village Guirim, 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 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 plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 5, sub-division No. 1, of Village Guirim, Bardez Taluka admeasuring an area of 2625 m2 which is earmarked as Paddy Field with CADA 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 plot of land admeasuring an area of 2625 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 5, sub-division No. 1, of Village Guirim, Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa which is earmarked as Paddy Field with CADA as per RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.

Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Administration/ /Planning).

Panaji, 5th February, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 36/18/211/17(2)/Guirim/5/2/TCP-2024/628

Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an application dated 14-12-2023 (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 8775 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 5, sub-division No. 2, of Village Guirim, 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 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 plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 5, sub-division No. 2 of Village Guirim, Bardez Taluka admeasuring an area of 8775 m2 which is earmarked as Paddy Field with CADA 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 plot of land admeasuring an area of 8775 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 5, sub-division No. 2 of Village Guirim, Bardez Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa which is earmarked as Paddy Field with CADA as per RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.

Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Administration/ /Planning).

Panaji, 5th February, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 36/18/216/17(2)/Deussua/48/10/TCP/2024/629

Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an application dated 11-09-2023 (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 as1116 OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA SERIES II No. 45 8TH FEBRUARY, 2024 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 7700 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 48, sub-division No. 10, of Village Deussua, 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 the plot of land surveyed under Survey No. 48, sub-division No. 10 of Village Deussua, Salcete Taluka admeasuring an area of 7700 m2 only which is earmarked as Paddy Field 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 the plot of land admeasuring an area of 7700 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 48, sub-division No. 10, of Village Deussua, Salcete Taluka, District South Goa, State of Goa which is earmarked as Paddy Field as per RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone.

Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Administration/

/Planning).

Panaji, 5th February, 2024.

————

Notification

No. 36/18/105/17(2)/Latambarcem/442/1C &1-D/ /TCP/2023/642

Whereas, the Department is in receipt of an application dated 02-08-2023 (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 37000 m2, surveyed under

Survey No. 442, sub-division No. 1-C & 1-D of Village

Latambarcem, Bicholim 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

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. 442,

sub-division No. 1-C & Survey No. 442, sub-division

No. 1-D of Village Latambarcem, Bicholim Taluka

admeasuring an area of 15830 m2 and 16100 m2

which is earmarked as Orchard Zone as per

RPG-2021, to Settlement Zone & Deletion of

Proposed 10 mts. road 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 15830 m2 & 16100 m2, surveyed under Survey No. 442, sub-division No. 1-C & 1-D, respectively, of Village Latambarcem, Bicholim Taluka, District North Goa, State of Goa which is earmarked as Orchard Zone as per RPG-2021 is hereby corrected as Settlement Zone &

Deletion of Proposed 10 mts. road.

Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Administration/

/Planning).

Panaji, 6th February, 2024.

Office of the Chief Town Planner (Admn./Planning)

–––

Corrigendum

No. 17/01/TC-UD/TCP/2015/254

In the Order No. 17/01/TC-UD/TCP/2015/176 dated 23-01-2024, in the first para, the date specified as "28-01-2023", may be read as "28-11-2023".

Other contents of the said order shall remain unchanged.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Goa.

Rajesh J. Naik, Chief Town Planner (Administration/Planning) & ex officio Joint Secretary.

Panaji, 1st February, 2024.

www.goaprintingpress.gov.in

Published and Printed by the Director, Printing & Stationery, Government Printing Press, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.

PRICE–Rs. 34.00

PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA—390/80—02/2024.