SERIES II No. 6

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410

Reg. No. RNP/GOA/32/2021-2023

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

Department of Agriculture

Directorate of Agriculture

–––

Order

No. 2/14/95/2023-24/Agri(Part)/Vol.II/207

Government is pleased to order the transfer of the following Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers of this Department

as indicated below against their names with immediate effect:

Sr.

Name of the Officer

Place of present posting

Place of posting on transfer

No.

Shri Sameer B. Naik

Zonal Agriculture Office, Mapusa

O/o. Assistant Director of

Agriculture (FT), Ela, Old Goa vice

Shri Yeshwant Gawas transferred.

Shri Yeshwant Gawas

O/o. Assistant Director of Agriculture

Zonal Agriculture Office, Tiswadi,

(FT), Ela, Old Goa

vice Kum. Diksha S. Naik transferred.

Kum. Diksha S. Naik

Zonal Agriculture Office, Tiswadi

Directorate of Agriculture, Head

Quarter against the vacant post

transferred from Government

Agriculture farm, Codar, Ponda

under the B.H. 2401,00,001,02,01

Salaries.

Shri Navnath S. Pisurlekar

Zonal Agriculture Office, Ponda

Zonal Agriculture Office, Bicholim

against the vacant post under the

B.H. 2401-00-001-03-01 Salaries.

Kum. Galgani P. Miranda

Zonal Agriculture Office, Quepem

Directorate of Agriculture, Head

Quarter against the vacant post

transferred from District Agriculture

Office (South), Margao under the

B.H. 2401-00-001-02-01 Salaries.

Panaji, 11th May, 2023 (Vaisakha 21, 1945)

Note:- There are two Extraordinary issues to the Official Gazette, Series II No. 5 dated 04-05-2023 as follows:—

(1) Extraordinary dated 04-05-2023 from pages 169 to 172 regarding Orders from Department of Home.

(2) Extraordinary (No. 2) dated 08-05-2023 from pages 173 to 178 regarding Order and Notification from Goa

State Election Commission.

179

Suggestions are welcomed on e-mail: [email protected]

180

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

Shri Omkar Desai

Zonal Agriculture Office, Ponda

Directorate of Agriculture, Head

Quarter against the vacant post

transferred from District Agriculture

Office (South), Margao under the

B.H. 2401-00-001-03-01 Salaries.

This is issued with approval of Government vide entry No. 1032 dated 12-04-2023.

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

Nevil Alphonso, Director (Agriculture) & ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Tonca, Caranzalem, 8th May, 2023.

———uuu———

Department of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services

–––

Order

No. 2/2/79-AH (Part)/2023-24/440

Government is pleased to order the transfer of the following Veterinary Officers in the Directorate of

Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, with immediate effect and in public interest to the stations as

indicated against their names:-

Sr. No.

Name with designation

Present place of posting

New place of posting

Dr. Gavin D. Furtado, Veterinary

Veterinary Dispensary,

Officer

Sanguem

Canacona.

Dr. Anisha Carol Pinheiro, Veterinary

Veterinary Dispensary,

Veterinary Hospital,

Officer

Canacona

Sonsodo.

The Officers shall be entitled for transfer TA/DA as per rule, however if the transferee does not change

their place of residence from old station to new, they will not be entitled for transfer TA as per the Rules

in force.

The Officers shall join their new place of posting with immediate effect.

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

Dr. Agostinho Misquita, Director & ex officio Joint Secretary (AH).

Panaji, 8th May, 2023.

————

Order

No. 2/2/79-AH (Part-I)/2023-24/521

Government is pleased to order the transfer of the following Assistant Directors in the Directorate of

Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, with immediate effect and in public interest to the stations as

indicated against their names:-

Sr. No.

Name with designation

Present place of posting

New place of posting

Dr. Shirishkumar S. Betkekar,

Head Office, Panaji with

Head Office, Panaji.

Assistant Director

additional charge of I/c

Government Livestock

Farm, Dhat Mollem &

Fodder Seed Production

Farm, Kalay

Dr. Atanazia T. Fernandes,

Veterinary Hospital, Sonsodo,

Veterinary Hospital,

Assistant Director

Raia

Sonsodo, Raia, with

additional charge of I/c

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

181

Government Livestock

Farm, Dhat Mollem &

Fodder Seed Production

Farm, Kalay.

The Officers shall be entitled for transfer TA/DA as per rule, however if the transferee does not change

their place of residence from old station to new, they will not be entitled for transfer TA as per the rules

in force.

The Officers shall join their new place of posting with immediate effect.

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

Dr. Agostinho Misquita, Director & ex officio Joint Secretary (AH).

Panaji, 9th May, 2023.

———u———

Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary

Services

–––

Order

No. 2-14-93-AH/Part-IV/2023-24/438

Read: No. 2-14-93-AH/Part-IV/2022-23/5648 dated

04-01-2023.

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/

/I/5/3(1)/2020/341 dated 16-11-2022, the Government

of Goa is pleased to appoint Dr. Vrishabha Vishwas

Naik to the post of “Veterinary Officer”, Group ‘B’

Gazetted under OBC Category in the Directorate of

Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, Panaji,

Goa on regular basis in the Pay Scale of PB-2:

Rs. 9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- plus

20% NPA (Level-7 of the 7th Pay Commission) and

other allowances as applicable.

His appointment will take effect from the date of

his joining the post. His character and antecedents

have been verified by the District Magistrate, South

Goa and he has been declared medically fit by the

Medical Board, Goa Medical College, Bambolim.

Upon joining the service, he shall be posted at

Government Livestock Farm, Dhat Mollem.

He shall draw his salary under Budget Head

Demand No. 65 “2404—Dairy Development, 00—,

102—Dairy Development Project, 06—Government

Livestock Farm (Plan), 01—Salaries.”

The above Officer shall be on probation for a

period of 2 years from the date of joining the post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Dr. Agostinho Misquita, Director & ex officio Joint

Secretary (AH).

Panaji, 8th May, 2023.

Order

No. 2-14-93-AH/Part-IV/2023-24/439

Read: No. 2-14-93-AH/Part-IV/2022-23/5647 dated

04-01-2023.

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/

/I/5/3(1)/2020/341 dated 16-11-2022, the Government

of Goa is pleased to appoint Dr. Gwenda Martina De

Souza to the post of “Veterinary Officer”, Group ‘B’

Gazetted under PWD Category in the Directorate of

Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, Panaji,

Goa on regular basis in the Pay Scale of PB-2:

Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- plus 20%

NPA (Level-7 of the 7th Pay Commission) and other

allowances as applicable.

Her appointment will take effect from the date of

her joining the post. Her character and antecedents

have been verified by the District Magistrate, South

Goa and she has been declared medically fit by the

Medical Board, Goa Medical College, Bambolim.

Upon joining the service, she shall be posted at

Veterinary Dispensary, Sanguem.

She shall draw her salary under Budget Head

Demand No. 65 “2551—Hill Areas, 01—Western

Ghats, 800—Other Expenditure, 01—Dairy

Development (Plan), 01—Salaries.”

The above Officer shall be on probation for a

period of 2 years from the date of joining the post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Dr. Agostinho Misquita, Director & ex officio Joint

Secretary (AH).

Panaji, 8th May, 2023.

182

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

Department of Captain of Ports

–––

Order

No. A 12046/1214

Read:

Memorandum No. A 11022/2021/Tech.

Sup(Ports)/COP/283 dated 30-01-2023.

Letter No. 4/105/85-H/GMC/2023/339

dated 27-04-2023.

Letter No. 36/09/2023/MISC/MAG/245/

/X/M.O. 981 dated 30-03-2023.

On the recommendations of the Goa Public

Service Commission as conveyed vide their letter

No. COM/I/5/13(3)/2021/423 dated 23-12-2022,

Government is pleased to appoint Shri Arjun L.

Fadate as Technical Superintendent (Ports), (Group

‘B’ Gazetted), in the Captain of Ports Department,

Panaji, in the Level 9 of the Pay Matrix (Pre-revised

PB-2 Rs. 9300-34800 + Rs. 5400 GP) with effect from

the date of joining the post, as per the terms and

conditions contained in the Memorandum cited

above.

He shall be on probation for a period of two years.

Shri Arjun L. Fadate has been declared fit by the

Medical Board of the Goa Medical College,

Bambolim vide Certificate dated 24-04-2023

forwarded vide letter No. 4/105/85-H/GMC/2023/339

dated 27-04-2023. Further, his character and

antecedents have been verified through the District

Collector, South vide letter No. 36/09/2023/MISC/

/MAG/245/X/M.O. 981 dated 30-03-2023 and nothing

adverse has been reported.

This appointment is made against the vacancy

caused due to superannuation of Shri Stephen S.

Braganza. The post of Technical Superintendent

(Ports) has been approved by High Level

Empowered Committee (H.L.E.C.) as per the final

sanctioned staff strength of the Department vide

Order No. COP/2012/2/Corresp.(PER)/Part-III(Part)/

/1297 dated 15-05-2020.

The appointee shall draw his salaries against the

Budget Head: 3051—Ports & Lighthouses,

02—Minor Ports, 800—Other Expenditure,

01—Navigational Aid, 01—Salaries.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Shri Vikas S. N. Gaunekar, Captain of Ports & ex

officio Joint Secretary.

Panaji, 5th May, 2023.

Department of Co-operation

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies

–––

Order

No. 60/188/M.O.C/W-II/RCS/358

Read: Letter No. R-11016/52/2022-CTP dated

17-03-2023 from Joint Secretary to the

Government of India, Ministry of

Co-operation, CTP Division, New Delhi.

Vide above read letter, it is informed that the

Union Cabinet in its meeting held on 15-02-2023

has approved the plan for “Strengthening

Co-operative Movement in the Country and

Deepening its Reach up to the Grassroots” by

setting up new multipurpose PACS or dairy/fishery

primary Co-operative Societies in each uncovered

Panchayat/village in the country as the case may

be, and strengthening existing PACS and dairy/

/fishery co-operatives through convergence of

various identified Schemes of Government of India.

In order to ensure smooth and effective

implementation of the plan, an Inter-Ministerial

Committee (IMC) has been constituted under the

Chairmanship of Hon’ble Union Minister for

Co-operation.

A National Level Co-ordination Committee

(NLCC) under the Chairmanship of Secretary

(Co-operation), Government of India has also been

constituted to steer the overall implementation of

the Scheme.

The implementation plan requires all the States/

/UTs to constitute State Co-operative Development

Committee (SCDC) at the State level and District

Co-operative Development Committee (DCDC) in

each District in order to ensure implementation of

the plan. The Government has constituted the State

Co-operative Development Committee (SCDC) for

the State of Goa.

Now, therefore in accordance with the

implementation plan, the Government is pleased to

constitute the District Co-operative Development

Committees (DCDC) for the North Goa and South

Goa Districts as under.

A. District Co-operative Development Committee

(DCDC) for North Goa District:

1. District Collector (North)

—

Chairperson.

2. CEO, Zilla Panchayat (North) —

Member.

3. Additional Collector-I (North)

—

Member.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

183

4. Deputy Registrar of

—

Convener.

Co-operative Societies (Tech.)/

/District Level Incharge (North)

5. Deputy Director of Animal

—

Member.

Husbandry & Veterinary

Services

6. Deputy Director of Fisheries

—

Member.

7. Deputy Director of Agriculture —

Member.

8. Representative not below the

—

Member.

rank of General Manager of

the Goa State Co-operative

Bank Ltd.

9. District Development Manager —

Member.

(DDM)/Representative for

Goa Regional office of

NABARD

10. Representative of NDDB

—

Member.

11. Representative of NFDB

—

Member.

12. Managing Director of the

—

Member.

Goa State Co-operative Milk

Producer’s Union Ltd., Curti,

Ponda-Goa

B. District Co-operative Development Committee

(DCDC) for South Goa District:

1. District Collector (South)

— Chairperson.

2. CEO, Zilla Panchayat (South) — Member.

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

4. Deputy Registrar of

— Convener.

Co-operative Societies

(Admin.)/District Level

Incharge (South)

5. Deputy Director of Animal

— Member.

Husbandry & Veterinary

Services

6. Deputy Director of Fisheries

— Member.

7. Deputy Director of Agriculture

— Member.

8. Representative not below

— Member.

the rank of General Manager

of the Goa State Co-operative

Bank Ltd.

9. District Development Manager

— Member.

(DDM)/Representative for Goa

Regional office of NABARD

10. Representative of NDDB

— Member.

11. Representative of NFDB

— Member.

12. Managing Director of the

— Member.

Goa State Co-operative Milk

Producers’ Union Ltd., Curti,

Ponda-Goa

The role and responsibilities of the District

Co-operative Development Committee (DCDC) are

as under:

1. To ensure regular and timely updation of

National Co-operative Database.

2. To prepare the District Plan for setting up of

new multipurpose PACS or primary dairy/

/fishery Co-operative Societies on the basis of

the gap analysis from National Co-operative

Database.

3. To ensure that all the Panchayats/Villages in

the district are covered by multipurpose PACS

or primary dairy/fishery Co-operative Societies

as the case may be.

4. To establish linkages of existing and new

primary Co-operative Societies with State

Co-operative Bank and/or their respective

District/Block level federations, if any, with

the support of State Government and other

stakeholders concerned. If District/Block level

federations are not existent, then linkages

may be established with the Federations

present in nearby District/Block.

5. To facilitate setting up of District level

federations, if not presently existent, as per

requirement and viability assessment, in

co-ordination with State Government and

stakeholders concerned.

6. To facilitate registration of new primary

Co-operative Societies with the support of

Registrar of Co-operative Societies.

7. To ensure dovetailing of various schemes of

Government of India at the level of PACS or

primary dairy/fishery Co-operative Societies to

improve their viability and make them vibrant

economic entities.

8. To provide all necessary infrastructure and

logistical support to primary Co-operative

Societies at the Panchayat/Village level,

including allotment of Government/Gram

Sabha land to PACS.

9. To co-ordinate with all stakeholders concerned

and provide all necessary support for ensuring

implementation of the plan at the ground level.

10. Any other related matters.

The DCDC shall abide by the guidelines for the

implementation of the plan. The Department of

Co-operation shall be the convener of the DCDC.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Vishant S. N. Gaunekar, Registrar (Co-operative

Societies) & ex officio Joint Secretary (Co-operation).

Panaji, 2nd May, 2023.

184

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

Order

No. 60/188/M.O.C/W-II/RCS/359

Read:

Letter No. R-11016/52/2022-CTP dated

17-03-2023 from Joint Secretary to the

Government of India, Ministry of

Co-operation, CTP Division, New Delhi.

Vide above read letter, it is informed that the

Union Cabinet in its meeting held on 15-02-2023

has approved the plan for “Strengthening

Co-operative Movement in the Country and

Deepening its Reach up to the Grassroots” by

setting up new multipurpose PACS or Dairy/Fishery

Primary Co-operative Societies in each uncovered

Panchayat/Village in the country as the case may

be, and strengthening existing PACS and Dairy/

/Fishery Co-operatives through convergence of

various identified Schemes of Government of India.

In order to ensure smooth and effective

implementation of the plan, an Inter-Ministerial

Committee (IMC) has been constituted under the

Chairmanship of Hon’ble Union Minister for

Co-operation.

A National Level Co-ordination Committee

(NLCC) under the Chairmanship of Secretary

(Co-operation), Government of India has also been

constituted to steer the overall implementation of

the Scheme.

The implementation plan requires all the States/

/UTs to constitute State Co-operative Development

Committee (SCDC) at the State level and District

Co-operative Development Committee (DCDC) in

each District in order to ensure implementation of

the plan.

Now, therefore in accordance with the

implementation plan, the Government is pleased to

constitute the State Co-operative Development

Committee (SCDC) for the State of Goa as under.

State Co-operative Development Committee (SCDC):

1. Chief Secretary,

—

Chairperson.

Government of Goa

2. Secretary (Co-operation),

—

Convener.

Government of Goa

3. Secretary (Animal Husbandry —

Member.

& Veterinary Services),

Government of Goa

4. Secretary (Fisheries),

—

Member.

Government of Goa

5. Secretary (Rural Development), —

Member.

Government of Goa

6. Additional Secretary (Finance), —

Member.

Government of Goa

7. Director of Agriculture,

—

Member.

Government of Goa

8. Joint Secretary (Revenue),

—

Member.

Government of Goa

9. Registrar of Co-operative

—

Member.

Societies, Government of Goa

10. A Representative from

—

Member.

National Bank for Agriculture

and Rural Development

(NABARD), Goa Regional Office

11. A Representative from

—

Member.

Regional Office of National

Co-operative Development

Corporation (NCDC)

12. A Representative from

—

Member.

Regional Office of National

Dairy Development Board

(NDDB)

13. A Representative from

—

Member.

Regional Office of National

Fisheries Development

Board (NFDB)

14. Chairman of the Goa State

—

Member.

Co-operative Bank Ltd., Panaji

15. Chairman of the Goa State

—

Member.

Co-operative Milk Producers’

Union Ltd., Curti, Ponda, Goa

The roles and responsibilities of the State

Co-operative Development Committee (SCDC) are as

under.

1. To ensure that all the Panchayats/Villages in

the State are covered by Multipurpose PACS or

primary dairy/fishery co-operative societies, as

the case may be.

2. To review the district-wise action plan for

setting up new multipurpose PACS or primary

dairy/fishery co-operative societies with a total

target of establishing two lakh such societies

in the next five years across the country.

3. To extend all necessary support in preparation

and updation of National Co-operative

Database.

4. To prepare an action plan in co-ordination with

NABARD, NDDB, NFDB, NAFSCOB, NCDFI &

FISHCOPED to set up State/District level

federations if not presently existent, as per

requirement and viability assessment.

5. To assist in establishing linkages of existing

and new primary co-operative societies with

State Co-operative Bank and/or their respective

District and State level Federations.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

185

6. To ensure convergence of various Schemes of

Government of India at the level of PACS or

dairy/fishery primary co-operative societies to

make them vibrant economic entities.

7. To provide all necessary policy support for

creation of infrastructure at the level of

Co-operative Societies, including allotment of

Government/Gram Sabha land to PACS.

8. To extend all necessary support to District

Co-operative Development Committees (DCDC)

for implementation of the plan at the grassroot

level.

9. To monitor the progress of implementation of

the action plan at the State Level.

10. Any other related matters.

The SCDC shall abide by the guidelines for the

implementation of the plan. The Department of

Co-operation shall be the convener of the SCDC.

By order and in the name of the Governor

of Goa.

Vishant S. N. Gaunekar, Registrar (Co-operative

Societies) & ex officio Joint Secretary (Co-operation).

Panaji, 2nd May, 2023.

———u———

Office of the Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative

Societies

–––

No. 3-29/11-12/ARBZ/Urban/Reg/115

Read: 1. Certificate of Registration dated

05-12-1995 of The Sattari Urban Co-op.

Credit Society Ltd., Valpoi, Sattari-Goa.

2. This office Memo No. 3-29/11-12/ARBZ/

/Urban/Reg/1422 dated 30-03-2023.

3. This office Order No. 3-29/11-12/ARBZ/

/Urban/Reg/115 dated 25-04-2023.

4. Letter No. SUCCSL/HO/2023-2024/13

dated 18-04-2023 from Managing

Director of the Sattari Urban Co-op.

Credit Society Ltd., Valpoi, Sattari-Goa,

surrendering therewith the original

Certificate of Registration of the society.

Consequent upon the change in sub-classification

vide amendment as Sr. No. 02 of the above, the

Certificate of Registration of the Sattari Urban Co-op.

Credit Society Ltd, Valpoi, Sattari-Goa is amended

as under:-

Amended Certificate of Registration

The Certificate of Registration dated 05-12-1995

bearing code symbol No. RES-(a)-22/NZ/Goa stands

amended with immediate effect to the following

extent:-

The sub-classification of the society appearing in

the Registration Certificate referred at Sr. No. 01, be

read as “Sattari Multipurpose Co-op. Society Ltd.,

Valpoi, Sattari-Goa” in place of “Sattari Urban Co-op.

Credit Society Ltd., Valpoi, Sattari-Goa’’ under

classification No. 10(c) under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8

of the Goa Co-op. Societies Rules, 2003.

Hemant S. Khedekar, Spl. Auditor/Co-op. Officer

Co-op. Societies, Bicholim Zone, Unit Incharge-III.

Sankhali, 25th April, 2023.

———uuu———

Department of Education, Art & Culture

Directorate of Education

–––

Order

No. 1-(2)-10-2003/SE/22

Smt. Kavita M. Naik Gaunkar, Deputy Education

Officer, Central Educational Zone, Panaji, Goa shall

hold the additional charge of the Principal, Dr. T.B.

Cunha Higher Secondary School, Campal, Panaji,

Goa with immediate effect until further orders in

addition to her own duties. The date of joining

should be communicated to this office.

This issues with the approval of Government vide

U.O. No. 658/F dated 02-05-2023.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Shailesh R. S. Zingde, Director (Education) & ex

officio Joint Secretary.

Porvorim, 8th May, 2023.

———uuu———

Department of General Administration

–––

Notification

No. 2/2/2010-GAD-III/1727

In exercise of the powers conferred by the

explanation to Section 25 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (Act 26 of 1881) delegated by

the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs,

New Delhi, vide Notification No. U-11030/2/73-UTL

dated 28-06-1973, read with Section 135B of the

Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Central Act

43 of 1951), the Government of Goa hereby declares

Wednesday, the 10th May, 2023 (Vaisakha 20, Saka

1945) as a “Paid Holiday” being the “Polling Day”

for the General Elections to the Karnataka

Legislative Assembly, 2023 to the electors of

Karnataka State.

186

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

The aforesaid holiday shall be a “paid holiday”,

in addition to the holidays indicated in the

Notification No. 37/4/2022-GAD-III/3661 dated

19-10-2022, published in the Official Gazette,

Series II No. 30 dated 27-10-2022, to the

establishments as detailed below:-

(i)

industrial workers of the State of Goa;

(ii) daily wage workers of the Government

Departments and State Government

Industrial Departments;

(iii) commercial and industrial workers of private

establishments in the State of Goa;

(iv) all private establishments;

(v) daily wage/casual workers employed in any

business, trade, industrial undertakings or

any other establishments.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 8th May, 2023.

———uuu———

Goa State Higher Education Council

–––

Order

No. ACAD III/SHEC/Confirmation/03/2021/1062

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission vide its letter No. COM/II/12/78(1)/

/2023/38 dated 13-04-2023, Government is pleased

to declare that the following Professor for Teaching,

Learning and Educational Technology for State

Higher Education Council under Directorate of

Higher Education has completed his probation

period successfully with effect from the date

indicated in Column No. 3 against his name and he

is confirmed in his respective post with effect from

the date indicated in column No. 3 against his name

accordingly:-

Sr.

Name

Date of completion

No.

and designation

of probation period

Dr. Niyan Joseph Savio

09-08-2022.

Marchon, Professor for

Teaching, Learning and

Educational Technology

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Deepti D. Gaonkar, Under Secretary (Higher

Education).

Porvorim, 5th May, 2023.

Department of Home

Home—General Division

–––

Order

No. 3/2/91-HD(G)/Vol.IV/1218

On the recommendation of the Departmental

Promotion Committee as conveyed by Goa Public

Service Commission vide their letter No. COM/II/11/

/21(2)/2022/25 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to promote following Station Fire Officers

to the post of Assistant Divisional Officer, Group ‘B’

Gazetted in the pay scale of PB-2 Rs. 9300-34800+

Grade Pay Rs. 4600/- (Level 7 of the 7th Pay

Commission) from the date of taking over charge of

the post.

Sr.

Name of the

Posted on promotion

No.

Officer

1. Shri Ajit K. Kamat

Asst. Divisional Officer at

Central Zone, Ponda-Goa.

2. Shri Mervyn B. A.

Asst. Divisional Officer at

Ferrao

North Zone, Panaji-Goa.

3. Shri Francisco Mendes

Asst. Divisional Officer at

South Zone, Margao-Goa.

All the above Officers shall be on probation for

period of 2 years.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Vivek K. Naik, Under Secretary (Home-I).

Porvorim, 3rd May, 2023.

———uuu———

Department of Labour

–––

Order

No. 24/6/2013-Lab-ESI/310

Government is pleased to accept with ex-post-

-facto effect, the notice of voluntary retirement

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

187

dated 30-01-2023 tendered by Dr. Deepa Kerkar, Senior Gynecologist in ESI Scheme under Labour

Department, under Rule 48-A of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

Dr. Deepa Kerkar stands relieved from the post of Senior Gynecologist in ESI Scheme under Labour

Department, with effect from 30-04-2023 (f. n.).

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

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 5th May, 2023.

————

Order

No. 24/3/87-Lab-Part-I (Vol-I)/ESI/313

Government is pleased to order the transfer and posting of the following Insurance Medical Officers in

E.S.I. Scheme, under office of Commissioner, Labour & Employment, in public interest, with immediate effect

as under:

Sr.

Name of the Insurance

Present place of posting

Place of posting on transfer

No.

Medical Officer

Dr. Vithu D. Naik

ESI Dispensary, Panaji

ESI Dispensary, Ponda.

Dr. Kimya Mahatme

ESI Dispensary, Ponda

ESI Dispensary, Panaji.

This order shall come into force with immediate effect.

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

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 8th May, 2023.

————

Notification

No. 28/02/2023-LAB/Part-I/284

The following Award passed by the Labour

Court-II, at Panaji-Goa on 03-04-2023 in Case No.

Ref. LC-II/IT/09/2014 is hereby published as required

under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 26th April, 2023.

———

IN THE LABOUR COURT-II

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

AT PANAJI

(Before Shri Suresh N. Narulkar, Hon’ble

Presiding Officer)

Case No. Ref. LC-II/IT/09/2014

Shri Moratram Polle,

R/o. H. No. 411, Podwal,

Corjuvem, Aldona,

Bardez-Goa

.... Workman/Party-I.

V/s

M/s. Andrew Telecommunication

India Pvt. Ltd.,

Verna Industrial Estate,

Verna-Goa

.... Employer/Party-II.

Workman/Party I represented by Adv. Shri Pravin

Naik.

Employer/Party II represented by Adv. Shri P.

Chawdikar.

Panaji, dated: 03-04-2023.

AWARD

1. In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause

Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947), the

Government of Goa, by Order dated 30-09-2014,

bearing No. 28/32/2014-Lab/571 referred the

following dispute for adjudication to this Labour

Court-II, Panaji, Goa.

“(1)

Whether the action the management of

M/s. Andrew Telecommunication India

Private Limited, Verna Industrial Estate,

Verna, Goa, in dismissing Shri Moratram

Polle, Operator-I, from service with effect

from 24-01-2014, is legal and justified?

(2)

If not, what relief the Workman is entitled to?”

188

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

2. On receipt of the reference, a case was

registered under No. LC-II IT/09/14 and registered

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

the said notice, the Parties put in their appearance.

The Workman/Party-I (for short ‘Workman’), filed his

Statement of Claim on 10-02-2015 at Exb-5. The facts

of the case in brief as pleaded by the Workman are

that the Employer/Party-II (for short ‘Employer’) is

engaged inter-alia in manufacture of cables and

antenna. He stated that no sooner, the workmen of

the Employer have joined the union namely Goa

Kamgar Karmachari Sena as its members, the

Employer had been attempting to disrupt their unity

among themselves. He stated that there has been

harassment and victimization on the union members

due to their lawful trade union activities. He stated

that the harassment inter-alia included illegal

changes in service conditions in the colour of work

assessment, charge-sheets on false and fabricated

grounds, unjustified and unwarranted suspension

and terminations based on these false charge-sheets,

punitive suspension and termination by way of

punishment for minor misconducts. He stated that

the members of the said union were targeted and as

such the Employer was also successful by terminating

the employment of almost all members leaving

behind few. He stated that he was amongst the left

over and was being the member of the same union

was also made a victim. He stated that he was also

falsely charge-sheeted and then subsequently

illegally terminated by way of dismissal without

following due disciplinary process including an

unbiased enquiry vide letter dated 24-01-2014. He

stated that he was issued a show-cause notice dated

30-11-2011. He stated that he has replied to the said

show-cause notice promptly denying the contentions

mentioned in the said show-cause notice by his reply

dated 08-12-2011. He stated that he was thereafter

falsely charge-sheeted without considering his reply

dated 08-12-2011. He stated that vide charge-sheet

dated 21-12-2011, he was charge-sheeted as under:

a) Clause NN (11): Commission of any acts

subversive of discipline or good behaviors on

the premises of the establishment or any place

outside the premises;

b) Clause NN (54): Knowingly or wrongfully

interfering with the records of attendance or

means of recording attendance of oneself or

any other employee or wilful falsification,

defacement, destruction or tampering with any

records of company.

c) Clause NN (60): Wilful disfigurement,

destruction or alteration of any record of the

company/Employer.

3. He stated that the charges levelled against him

were false. He stated that he denied the said charges

levelled against him by his reply dated 28-12-2011.

He stated that the Employer had decided to

terminate his services and he was subject to

victimization on one pretext or the other. He stated

that in order to create false records against him to

terminate his services, the Employer had issued

another show-cause notice dated 12-07-2012. He

stated that he replied to the said show-cause notice

promptly by denying the same by his reply dated

16-07-2012. He stated that he was once again falsely

charge-sheeted without considering his reply dated

16-07-2012. He stated that the following charges were

levelled against him vide charge-sheet dated

26-07-2012.

a) Clause NN (07): Habitual breach of any

standing order or any law applicable to the

establishments or any rules made thereunder.

b) Clause NN (11): Commission of any acts

subversive of discipline or good behaviors on

the premises of the establishment or any place

outside the premises.

c) Clause NN (22): Willful insubordination or

disobedience (whether or not in combination

with another) of any lawful and reasonable

order of superior.

d) Clause NN (37): Deliberately giving false

information regarding self e.g. name, age,

previous illness, father’s name, qualification,

previous experience or record.

e) Clause NN (47): Refusal to be search by any

security personnel or any other authorized

person of the establishment.

4. He stated that as the charges levelled against

him were false, he denied the same by his reply dated

03-08-2012. He stated that thereafter a false enquiry

was conducted against him on both the

charge-sheets i.e. charge-sheet dated 21-12-2011 and

dated 26-07-2012. He submitted that the

departmental enquiry held by the Enquiry Officer

was illegal, being violative of principles of natural

justice and fair play. He submitted that the allegations

made vide charge-sheet dated 21-12-2011 are not

proved either by oral or documentary evidence. He

submitted that the oral evidence contradicts the

documentary evidence on record. He submitted that

the allegations made vide charge-sheet dated

26-07-2012 are also not proved either by oral or

documentary evidence. He submitted that the entire

evidence on record is hearsay. He submitted that he

had not committed any misconduct as alleged in the

charge-sheets or otherwise. He submitted that the

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

189

departmental enquiry held against him is also illegal

and the findings of the Enquiry Officer are perverse.

He submitted that he was at no point of time at the

commencement of his employment or subsequently

in the course of his employment given a copy of the

Certified Standing Orders of the Employer claimed

to have been approved by the Certifying Officer under

the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,

1946. He submitted that at no point of time the

alleged Certified Standing Orders of the Employer

claimed to have been approved by the certifying

officer under the Industrial Employment (Standing

Orders) Act, 1946 ever displayed by the Employer in

English and in the language understood by the

majority of the workmen on special boards to be

maintained for the purpose at or near the entrance

through which the majority of the workmen enter

the industrial establishment and in all departments

thereof where the workmen are employed. He

submitted that the author/authors of the document

produced by the Employer at the enquiry into the

charges levelled against him were not examined. He

submitted that the contents of the said documents

could not have been relied upon by the Enquiry

Officer as not even the signature of the alleged author/

/authors was identified by the alleged author/

/authors of the said document in the course of

enquiry proceedings. He submitted that the said

documents are fabricated documents having no force

in law. He submitted that being satisfied with the

union previously representing him had switched his

loyalties to another union. He stated that the

Employer on number of occasions tried to coerce him

not to switch his loyalties to a union of his choice

which he did not heed. He stated that he was

therefore victimized by the Employer and foisted

charge-sheets on him and dismissed him from

service. He submitted that the said act of the

Employer amounts to an unfair labour practice under

the provisions of the I.D. Act and as such the entire

charge-sheets, the proceedings of the enquiry, the

order of termination are tainted by malafides on the

part of the Employer towards him. He submitted that

the Ld. Enquiry Officer has failed to give adequate

weightage to the defense raised by him. He

submitted that the alleged charges levelled against

him vide charge-sheet dated 21-12-2011 and dated

26-07-2012 cannot be said to be legally proved. He

submitted that the Enquiry Officer appointed by the

Employer was biased. He stated and the enquiry was

conducted without following the principles of

natural justice. He stated and that the charges

levelled against him are not legally tenable or proved.

He submitted that Shri Ravi Rebello, Manager-HR and

Administration, cannot terminate his services. He

submitted that he was dismissed vide order dated

24-01-2014 issued by the Employer is illegal,

unjustified as the same is passed without any

reasonable cause and for no misconduct committed

by him. He submitted that the findings of the Enquiry

Officer are not based on evidence on record and the

same is perverse. He submitted that the Ld. Enquiry

Officer did not consider the material contradictions

in the evidence of the management witnesses. He

submitted that after his dismissal he raised a dispute

before the conciliation authority which ended in

failure. He submitted that without prejudice to his

aforesaid contentions, the punishment of dismissal,

is disproportionate to the misconduct alleged against

him. He submitted that the order of termination by

way of dismissal lacks any reasoning as to why the

other scale of punishments prescribed could not be

adopted either singly or in combination of one or more

permutations and combination permissible under

law. He submitted that presently he is unemployed

and does not have any source of income and is facing

severe hardships due to his illegal dismissal from

service. The Workman therefore prayed that he is

entitled to be reinstated in service with full back

wages, continuity in service and consequential

benefits thereof.

5. The Employer resisted the claim of the

Workman by filing its written statement on

16-03-2015 at Exb. 6. The Employer, as and by way of

its preliminary objections, submitted that the present

reference filed by the Workman is bad-in-law and

not maintainable and that the Workman has not

given any justification for the demands/claims raised

by him. The Employer submitted that the dispute

raised by the Workman is not an ‘Industrial Dispute’

as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

and there is non application of mind by the

Appropriate Government, while referring the

present dispute.

6. The Employer stated that it is a company

registered under Companies Act, 1956 and is

engaged in manufacturing of communication of

infrastructure equipment’s. The Employer stated that

its factory was earlier situated at Pilerne Industrial

Estate. The Employer stated that all the workmen

have been shifted from Pilerne Industrial Estate

Factory to the facility build up at Verna Industrial

Estate. The Employer admitted that the Workman

was appointed as an Operator in Valuline

department. The Employer stated that the Workman

was issued two charge-sheets one dated 21-12-2011

and another dated 26-07-2012 and in the said charge-

-sheets it was alleged that the acts mentioned therein

on the part of the workman amounts to misconducts

as per its Certified Standing Orders applicable to him.

190

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

The Employer admitted that the charges levelled

against the Workman in the charge-sheet dated

21-12-2011 under Clause No. NN (11), Clause No. NN

(54) and Clause No. NN (60). The Employer admitted

that the charges levelled against the Workman in

charge-sheet dated 26-07-2012 under Clause No. NN

(7), Clause No. NN (11), Clause No. NN (22), Clause

No. NN (37) and Clause No. NN (47). The Employer

stated that the Employer was further called upon to

submit his explanation to the said charges on or

before 03-08-2012. The Employer stated that prior to

the issuance of the charge-sheets, the show-cause

notices were issued to the Workman and he had filed

replies to the said show-cause notices. The Employer

stated that however, they found that the said replies

were unsatisfactory. The Employer stated that

thereafter an enquiry was conducted by appointing

Shri Prashant Agarwal, as an Enquiry Officer. The

Employer stated that the Enquiry Officer submitted

his findings/report dated 25-09-2013 and dated

28-09-2013 holding the Workman guilty of the charges

levelled against him in the said charge-sheets issued

to him.

7. The Employer stated that from the records, it

can be seen that the Enquiry Officer conducted the

enquiry by following the principles of natural justice

and every conceivable opportunity have been

extended by the Enquiry Officer to the Workman to

participate in the enquiry proceeding as well as to

defend charges leveled against him. The Employer

stated that the Findings/Report of the Enquiry Officer

was based on the evidence on record and the

Enquiry Officer had appreciated the evidence as

mentioned in his findings dated 25-09-2013 and

28-09-2013. The Employer stated that Mr. Prassana

Chawdikar and Mr. Pravin Naik acted as management

representative and defense representative of the

Workman respectively in the said enquiry.

8. The Employer stated that they issued a letter

dated 16-12-2013 calling upon explanation from the

Workman, about the said findings/report. The

Employer stated that the Workman submitted his

explanation, vide his reply dated 24-12-2013. The

Employer submitted that they, being not satisfied

with the said explanation and considering the

gravity of proved misconduct, past records dismissed

the Workman from the services with effect from

24-01-2014 by paying all his legal dues as per law.

The Employer submitted that the dismissal of the

Workman from the services is just, fair and proper.

The Employer submitted that in the event, if the

enquiry is set aside on any of the grounds, they may

be permitted to lead fresh evidence before this

Hon’ble Tribunal to prove the said charges. The

Employer stated that the Workman is gainfully

employed since the date of his dismissal and as such

there is no hardships faced by him. The Employer

submitted that the termination by way of dismissal

of the Workman is legal and justified.

9. Thereafter, the case was fixed for rejoinder on

18-06-2015, however, Ld. Adv. P. Naik appearing for

the Party I submitted that he do not wish to file any

rejoinder.

10. Based on the pleadings filed by the respective

parties, this court framed certain issues on 18-08-2015

at Exb. 08. The said issues have been updated on

02-11-2015 at Exb.12 after hearing both the parties.

1. Whether a free, fair and proper enquiry were

conducted against the Workman/Party-I in

accordance with the principles of natural

justice in respect of charge-sheet dated

21-12-2011 and charge-sheet dated 26-07-2012?

2. Whether the charges of misconduct leveled

against the Workman vide charge-sheet dated

21-12-2011 and charge-sheet dated 26-07-2012

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 him

service w.e.f. 24-01-2014, is illegal and

unjustified?

4. Whether the Workman/Party-I proves that the

action of the Employer in dismissing him from

services w.e.f. 24-01-2014 amounts to

victimization and unfair labour practice?

5. Whether the Employer/Party-II proves that the

present order of reference is not maintainable

in law in view of the reasons stated by way of

preliminary objections in para 1 to 4 of the

Written Statement?

6. Whether the Workman/Party-I is entitled to any

relief?

7. What order? What award?

11. Thereafter this Hon’ble Court recorded the

evidence on the preliminary issue No. 1 and 2 and

passed order dated 11-12-2019 on the findings on the

preliminary issue No. 1 and 2 by holding that a fair

proper and impartial inquiry were conducted against

the Workman in accordance with the principles of

natural justice in respect of charge-sheet dated

21-12-2011 and charge-sheet dated 26-07-2012 and

that the charges of misconduct leveled against the

Workman vide charge-sheet dated 21-12-2011 and

charge-sheet dated 26-07-2012 have not been proved

to the satisfaction of this court by acceptable

evidence. Thereafter the matter was fixed for the

evidence of the Employer however Ld. Adv.

appearing for the respective parties submitted that

they are trying to settle the matter amicably between

the parties, but the matter could not settle between

the parties. Subsequently on 20-09-2022 the

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

191

Employer filed an application for amendment which

was allowed after hearing both parties by order dated

19-10-2022. Both the parties once again tried to settle

the matter amicably. Accordingly on 03-04-2023, the

Workman along with his Adv. Shri P. Naik as well as

the manager of the Employer along with Ld. Adv.

Shri P. Chawdikar remained present and submitted

that they have settled the matter amicably between

the parties and filed an application for Award in

terms of settlement. The terms of settlement as agreed

between the parties are reproduced hereunder:

a) That it is agreed between the parties to settle

the dispute amicably for a composite amount

of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three lakh fifty

thousand only) before this Hon’ble Court and

accordingly issue cheque/Demand Draft dated

03-04-2023 drawn on Panjim Branch, bearing

No. 003414.

b) The Party-II herein have agreed to pay sum of

Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three lakh fifty

thousand only) in full and final settlement of

the entire claim amount of the Party-I in the

present matter.

c) The Party-I herein declares that his claim in the

present matter is conclusively settled.

d) The Party No. I, Shri Moratram Polle states that

he is having no claim of whatsoever nature

against the Party No. II/Employer and that he

does not wish to pursue to the present reference

and treat the said reference as settled.

I have gone through the terms of settlement

signed by the parties hereinabove and is of the

opinion that the said terms of settlement are

beneficial to both the parties. The said terms of

settlement also useful for the harmonious relation

between the parties. Hence, I approved the same.

In view of above and with regards to the facts and

circumstances of the present case, I proceed to pass

the following order.

ORDER

1. It is held that the reference as to whether the

action the management of M/s. Andrew

Telecommunication India Private Limited,

Verna Industrial Estate, Verna, Goa, in

dismissing Shri Moratram Polle, Operator-I,

from service with effect from 24-01-2014, is legal

and justified, does not survive.

2. Inform the Government accordingly.

Sd/-

(Suresh N. Narulkar),

Presiding Officer,

Labour Court-II.

Notification

No. 28/02/2023-LAB/Part-I/285

The following Award passed by the Labour

Court-II, at Panaji-Goa on 03-04-2023 in Appln.

No. LC-II/IT/11/2012 is hereby published as required

under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 26th April, 2023.

———

IN THE LABOUR COURT-II

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

SHRAM SHAKTI BHAVAN

1ST FLOOR, PATTO PLAZA

PANAJI-GOA

(Before Shri Suresh N. Narulkar, Hon’ble

Presiding Officer)

Appln. No. LC-II/IT/11/2012

Shri. Uday Pednekar,

r/o. House No. 903/1,

Monteiro Vaddo,

Anjuna, Bardez-Goa

….

Workman/Party I.

V/s

M/s. Andrew Telecommunications

(India) Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No. N2, Phase IV,

Verna Industrial Estate,

Verna, Salcette-Goa

.….

Employer/Party II.

Workman/Party I represented by Adv. Shri Pravin

Naik.

Employer/Party II represented by Adv. Shri P.

Chawdikar.

Panaji, Dated 03-04-2023.

A W A R D

1. In exercise of the powers conferred by Clause

Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947), the

Government of Goa, by Order dated 26-11-2012,

bearing No. 28/42/2012-Lab/637, referred the

following dispute for adjudication by the Industrial

Tribunal of Goa. The Presiding Officer, Industrial

Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in turn assigned the

present dispute to the Labour Court-II vide her

Order dated 29-11-2012.

“(1) Whether the action of the Management of

M/s. Andrew Telecommunication (India)

Private Limited, Verna, Goa, in dismissing

192

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

from service Shri Uday Pednekar, Operator,

with effect from 30-09-2011, is legal and

justified?

(2) If not, what relief, the Workman is entitled

to?”.

2. On receipt of the reference, a case was

registered under No. LC-II-IT/11/2012 and registered

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

to the said notice, the Parties put in their

appearance. The Workman/Party-I (for short

‘Workman’), filed his Statement of Claim on

15-04-2013 at Exb. 7. The facts of the case in brief

as pleaded by the Workman are that the Employer/

/Party-II (for short ‘Employer’), his services were

illegally terminated by way of dismissal, vide letter

dated 30-09-2011 signed by Mr. Ravi Rebello,

Manager-HR & Admn. He stated that he had filed

his reply to the findings of the Enquiry Officer, vide

his letter dated 28-09-2011 addressed to the

Employer. He stated that the Employer has however

in its letter of dismissal issued to him, falsely stated

that he has not submitted any reply or say in respect

of the findings. He submitted that his aforesaid

reply to the findings of the Enquiry Officer was

considered by the Employer before passing the order

of his dismissal from service. He submitted that the

said non-consideration of his reply is itself constitute

grave violation of principles of natural justice.

3. He stated that he was not issued copy of the

Certified Standing Orders of the Employer. He stated

that at no point of time on the commencement of

his employment or subsequently in the course of

employment, which the Employer has claimed to

have been approved by the Certifying Officer under

the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act,

1946. He submitted that at no point of time, the

said alleged Certified Standing Orders of the

Employer were displayed in English and in the

language understood by the majority of the

workmen on special board to be maintained for the

purpose at or near the entrance, through which the

majority of workmen enters the industrial

establishment. He submitted that at the time of his

employment, it was not a condition of service to fill

up forms related to production. He stated that the

said forms were introduced unilaterally by the

Employer subsequently without obtaining approval

of the change in service conditions as mandated

under Section 33 of the I.D. Act, 1947. He submitted

that the authors of the documents produced by the

Employer at the enquiry into the charges levelled

against him were not examined. He submitted that

the said documents are fabricated having no force

in law. He stated that he, being dissatisfied with

the union previously representing him, had

switched his loyalty to another union. He stated

that the Employer on number of occasions tried to

coerce him not to switch his loyalty to a union of

his choice, which he did not heed. He submitted

that he was therefore victimized by the Employer

and the charge-sheet was foisted on him and he

was dismissed from service. He submitted that his

dismissal from service amounts to an unfair labour

practice under the provisions of the I.D. Act, 1947.

He submitted that the entire charge-sheet, the

proceedings of the enquiry and the order of

termination are tainted by malafide on the part of

the Employer. He submitted that the charges of

misconduct levelled against him are rooted in the

wrongful action of the Employer and as such the

said charges cannot be maintained against him. He

stated that the unfair labour practice committed

by the Employer were raised as a defense in the

enquiry. He submitted that he had filed his synopsis

of his defense, before the Enquiry Officer. He

submitted that the Ld. Enquiry Officer has however,

failed to give adequate weightage to the defense

raised by him. He submitted that the Ld. Enquiry

Officer has failed to take note that the Employer

has failed to comply with the mandatory provisions

of Section 9 of the Industrial Employment (Standing

Orders) Act, 1946. He submitted that the Ld. Enquiry

Officer was biased and enquiry was conducted

against him without following the principles of

natural justice. He submitted that the charges

levelled against him are not legally tenable or

proved. He submitted that without prejudice to the

above, the punishment of dismissal meted out to

him is disproportionate to the misconduct alleged

against him.

4. He stated that presently, he is unemployed

and does not have any source of income and is

facing severe hardship due to his illegal dismissal

from service. The Workman therefore prayed that

he be reinstated in service with full back wages,

continuity in service and consequential benefits

thereof.

5. The Employer resisted the claim of the

Workman by filing its written statement on

16-07-2013 at Exb. 8. The Employer, as and by way

of its preliminary objections, submitted that the

present reference filed by the Workman is bad-in-

-law and not maintainable and that the Workman

has not given any justification for the demands/

/claims raised by him. The Employer submitted that

the dispute raised by the Workman is not an

‘industrial dispute’ as defined under the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 and that there is non application

of mind by the Appropriate Government, while

referring the present dispute.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

193

6. The Employer stated that it is a company

registered under Companies Act, 1956 and is

engaged in manufacturing of telephone equipments.

The Employer stated that its factory was earlier

situated at Pilerne Industrial Estate. The Employer

stated that all the workmen have been shifted from

Pilerne Industrial Estate Factory to the facility build

up at Verna Industrial Estate. The Employer

admitted that the Workman was appointed as an

‘Operator Re-roll’ w.e.f. 01-10-2004 on probation. The

Employer stated that vide its letter dated

29-04-2008, the Workman was re-designated as

Operator-I in Grade B-1 w.e.f. 01-05-2008 and was

given a wage rise w.e.f. 01-04-2008.

7. The Employer stated that a charge-sheet dated

06-07-2010 was issued to the Workman. The

Employer stated that it was alleged that the

following acts mentioned in the said charge-sheet

on the part of the Workman amounts to misconducts

as per the Certified Standing Orders applicable to

the Workman.

a) Clause NN (02): Willfully slowing down in

performance of work or abetment or

instigation thereof.

b) Clause NN (07): Habitual breach of any

standing order or any law applicable to the

establishments or any rules made

thereunder.

c) Clause NN (10): Drunkenness, riotous,

disorderly, indecent or improper behavior

on the premises of the establishment or

outside the premises of the establishments

if it adversely affects or is likely to affect the

working or the discipline of the

establishments.

d) Clause NN (11): Commission of any acts

subversive of discipline or good behaviors

on the premises of the Establishment or any

place outside the premises.

e) Clause NN (12): Habitual neglect of work

or gross habitual negligence or gross

neglectof work or malingering.

f) Clause NN (20): Failure to observe safety

rules or instructions notified by the

Employer or failure to use safety devices or

equipment or interference with any safety

device or equipment installed within the

establishment.

Clause NN (21): Breach of any rules or

instructions given by superiors for proper

functioning or safety of the establishment.

Clause NN (22): Willful insubordination or

disobedience

(whether

not

combination with another) of any lawful and

reasonable order of superior.

Clause NN (25): Refusal to accept the

charge-sheet, order or other communication,

from the Management served in accordance

with Standing Orders.

Clause NN (32): Loitering, idling or wasting

time or not working during working hours

or being within the establishments after

authorized hours of work without

permission.

k) Clause NN (40): Use of impolite or insulting

or abusive language, assault or threat of

assault, either provoked or otherwise

intimidation or coercion within the

precincts of the Company against any

employee of the Company/firm or Officers

or Customers or any other person authorized

to work in the Company and any such act

outside the premises of the Company, if it

directly affects or is likely to affect the

discipline or work or business of the

establishment.

Clause NN (49): Pursuance of any conduct

against the interest of the Company/

/Employer.

m) Clause NN (50): Poor or unsatisfactory

Workmanship/poor performance.

n) Clause NN (62): Refusal to wear uniforms/

/safety apparels by the company while on

duty.

8. The Employer stated that the Workman was

further called upon to submit his explanation to

the said charge-sheet on or before 13-07-2010. The

Employer stated that prior to the issuance of charge-

sheet, several memorandum and show-cause

notices were issued to the Workman. The Employer

stated that the Workman also filed his reply to the

said show-cause notices, but the said replies were

found unsatisfactory.

9. The Employer admitted that it has conducted

an enquiry against the Workman by appointing Mr.

Ajay A. Kadam, as an Enquiry Officer. The Employer

stated that initially Mr. V. A. Lotlikar and

subsequently Mr. Pravin Naik acted as a Defense

Representative of the Workman in the said Enquiry.

The Employer stated that Mr. Kishor Baligar acted

as a Management Representative in the said

Enquiry. The Employer stated that the Ld. Enquiry

Officer, Mr. Ajay A. Kadam, submitted his findings

194

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

/report dated 14-09-2011 holding the Workman

guilty of the charges leveled against him in the

said charge-sheet issued to him. The Employer

stated that from the records, it can be seen that the

Ld. Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry by

following the principles of natural justice and every

conceivable opportunity have been extended by

the Enquiry Officer to the Workman to participate

in the enquiry proceeding as well as to defend

charges leveled against him. The Employer stated

that the Findings/Report of the Ld. Enquiry Officer

is based on the evidence on record and the Ld.

Enquiry Officer had appreciated the evidence as

mentioned in his findings dated 14-09-2011.

10. The Employer stated that they issued a copy

of the findings/Enquiry report to the Workman,

calling upon explanation from him on or before

27-09-2011 about the said report. The Employer

stated that the Workman submitted his explanation,

vide his reply dated 28-09-2011. The Employer

submitted that they, being not satisfied with the

said explanation and considering the gravity of

proved misconduct, dismissed the Workman from

the services with effect from 30-09-2011 by paying

all his legal dues. The Employer submitted that the

dismissal of the Workman from the services is just,

fair and proper. The Employer submitted that in the

event, if the enquiry is set aside on any of the

grounds, they may be permitted to lead fresh

evidence before this Hon’ble Tribunal to prove the

said charges. The Employer submitted that the

termination by way of dismissal of the Workman is

legal and justified.

11. Thereafter, the Workman filed his rejoinder at

Exb. 9. The Workman, by way of his rejoinder,

reiterates all the submissions and averments made

by him in his Claim Statement to be true and correct

and denies all the statements and averments made

by the Employer in their Written Statement, which

are contrary and inconsistent to the statements

and averments made by him.

12. Based on the pleadings filed by the respective

parties, this court framed the following issues on

22-08-2014 at Exb. 21.

Whether a free, fair and proper enquiry has

been conducted against the Workman in

accordance with the principles of natural

justice?

Whether the charges of misconduct leveled

against the Workman have been proved to

the satisfaction of this court by an

acceptable evidence?

Whether the Workman/Party-I proves that

the action of the management of the

Employer in dismissing him from services

w.e.f. 30-9-2011 is illegal and unjustified?

Whether the Workman/Party-I proves that

the action of the Employer/Party-II is

dismissing him from services amounts to

unfair labour practices?

Whether the Employer/Party-II proves that

the reference is bad in law in view of the

preliminary objections raised in para 1 to 4

of its written statement?

Whether the Workman is entitled to any

relief?

What order? What Award?

13. Thereafter this Hon’ble Court recorded the

evidence on the preliminary issue No. 1 and 2 and

passed order dated 18-07-2017 on the findings on

the preliminary issue No. 1 and 2 by holding that

a fair and proper inquiry has been conducted

against the Workman in accordance with the

principles of natural justice read with the provisions

of Certified Standing Orders of the Employer

Company and that except the charge of misconduct

i.e. Clause NN (40) of the Certified Standing Orders

of the Employer Company, the management has

successfully proved all the charges of misconduct

levelled against the Workman vide charge-sheet

dated 06-07-2010. Subsequently Ld. Adv. appearing

for the respective parties submitted that they are

trying to settle the matter amicably between the

parties. However they could not settle the matter

amicably. Thereafter on 20-09-2022 the Employer

filed an application for amendment which was

allowed after hearing both parties by order dated

19-10-2022. Both the parties once again tried to

settle the matter amicably. Accordingly on

03-04-2023, the Workman along with his Adv.

Shri P. Naik as well as the manager of the Employer

along with Ld. Adv. Shri P. Chawdikar remained

present and submitted that they have settled the

matter amicably between the parties and filed an

application for Award in terms of settlement. The

terms of settlement as agreed between the parties

are reproduced hereunder:

That it is agreed between the parties to

settle the dispute amicably for a composite

amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three lakh

fifty thousand only) before this Hon’ble

Court and accordingly issue cheque/

/Demand Draft dated 03-04-2023 drawn on

Panjim Branch, Bearing No. 003415.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

195

b) The Party-II herein have agreed to pay sum

of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakh fifty

thousand only) in full and final settlement

of the entire claim amount of the Party-I in

the present matter.

c) The Party-I herein declares that his claim in

the present matter is conclusively settled.

d) The Party No. I, Shri Uday Pednekar states

that he is having no claim of whatsoever

nature against the Party No. II/Employer and

that he does not wish to pursue to the

present reference and treat the said

reference as settled.

I have gone through the terms of settlement

signed by the parties hereinabove and is of the

opinion that the said terms of settlement are

beneficial to both the parties. The said terms of

settlement also useful for the harmonious relation

between the parties. Hence, I approved the same.

In view of above and with regards to the facts

and circumstances of the present case, I proceed to

pass the following order.

O R D E R

1. It is held that the reference as to Whether the

action of the Management of M/s. Andrew

Telecommunication (India) Private Limited,

Verna, Goa, in dismissing from service Shri

Uday Pednekar, Operator, with effect from

30-09-2011, is legal and justified, does not

survive.

Inform the Government accordingly.

Sd/-

(Suresh N. Narulkar),

Presiding Officer,

Labour Court-II.

————

Notification

No. 28/02/2023-LAB/299

The following Award passed by the Industrial

Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on

12-04-2023 in Ref. No. IT/28/2015 is hereby

published as required under Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of

1947).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 03rd May, 2023.

IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

AND LABOUR COURT

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

AT PANAJI

(Before Mr. Anil Scaria, Hon’ble Presiding

Officer)

Ref. No. IT/28/2015

The President,

Goa Milk Union Employees

Association, Curti,

Ponda-Goa.

…… Workmen/Party I

V/s

M/s. Goa State Co-op.

Milk Producers’ Union Ltd.,

Curti, Ponda-Goa. …… Employer/Party II

Workmen/Party-I represented by Learned

Representative Shri P. Gaonkar.

Employer/Party-II represented by Learned Advocate

Shri P. Chawdikar.

AWARD

(Delivered on this the 12th day of the month of

April of the year 2023)

By Order dated 22-07-2015, bearing No.

28/42/2015-Lab/712, the Government of Goa in

exercise of powers conferred by Section 10(1)(d) of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, has referred the

following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

“(1) Whether the action of Goa State Co-operative

Milk Producers’ Union Limited, Curti, Ponda,

Goa, in reducing the contributions towards

Provident Fund w.e.f. April, 2011 to August,

2015, without complying with the provisions

of Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947 (Central Act No. 14 of 1947), is legal and

justified?

(2) If not, what relief the workmen are entitled

to?”

2. The Workmen/Party I has filed their Statement

of Claim. The Employer/Party II has filed its Written

Statement. The Workmen/Party I have filed their

Rejoinder. The Written Statement was amended. Party

I has filed an Additional Rejoinder.

3. Party I states in their Statement of Claim that

the workmen of Party II are covered by the Employees

Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,

1952. That Party II was contributing 12% of the gross

basic wages towards the Provident Fund of the

workmen. That in the Month of April, 2011, Party II

reduced its contribution to 12% upto a maximum of

Rs. 6,500/-. That, this was done without issuing notice

under section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

That, the workmen noticed the change when salaries

196

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

were paid to them in the first week of May, 2011. That

Party I wrote a letter to Party II to restore the benefits.

(It appears to be the case of Party I that the reduction

in the contribution of Party II was made with the

consent of the Office of the Provident Fund

Commissioner, Panaji). That, Party I approached the

Office of the Provident Fund Commissioner, Panaji.

That during discussion, the Provident Fund

Commissioner informed Party I that the decision was

taken by his predecessor in Office and he cannot

change the same. That Party I wrote letter dated

04-07-2013 to the Assistant Labour Commissioner.

That, the Assistant Labour Commissioner called both

Parties for conciliation. That Party I refused to restore

the service conditions. That, the conciliation failed.

That the Assistant Labour Commissioner reported

the same to the Government. That the Government

has referred the dispute to this Tribunal. That the

Office of the Provident Fund Commissioner had not

issued notice to the workmen or heard them before

allowing Party II to reduce their contribution.

Therefore, it is prayed that it be declared that the

action of the Employer in reducing Employer’s

contribution towards the Provident Fund is illegal,

unjustified and bad in law. That the Employer be

directed to contribute the Employer’s contribution

at the rate of 12% of the gross basic wage from

01-04-2011 along with interest and remit the same to

their respective accounts.

4. The Employer/Party II has stated in its Written

Statement that Party II was contributing 12% of the

basic wage towards Provident Fund of the workmen.

That due to the financial position of Party II, Party II

addressed a letter dated 01-01-2011 to the Regional

Provident Fund Commissioner asking him to permit

Party II to make the Employer’s contribution to the

Provident Fund on the basic ceiling limit of Rs. 6,500/-

That the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

addressed a letter dated 01-04-2011 to Party II. That

by this letter the Regional Provident Fund

Commissioner informed Party II that the Competent

Authority had granted their request with effect from

April, 2007. That reduction of the contribution by

Party II to the Provident Fund of the workmen does

not affect their condition of service. That it was not

necessary to issue notice under Section 9-A of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Party II had issued

Office Order dated 27-04-2011 bringing it to the

attention of the workmen that the Employer’s

contribution to the Provident Fund has been reduced

as stated above. It is denied that the Office of the

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner had not

issued notice to the workmen before reducing

Employer’s contribution to the Provident Fund. That

the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous

Provisions Act, 1952 is a complete Code in itself. That,

therefore, this Court does not have the jurisdiction

to entertain the present dispute. That Party II is not

an industry and that no industrial dispute arises in

this case. That Party I does not have the locus standi

to raise the dispute on behalf of the workmen.

Therefore, it is prayed that the claim of Party I be

dismissed with heavy costs.

5. Party I states in its Rejoinder and additional

Rejoinder that Party II is an industry and that an

industrial dispute exists. It is denied that Party I does

not have the locus standi to raise the dispute on

behalf of the workmen. It is denied that this Tribunal

does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present

dispute. That, the Regional Provident Fund

Commissioner did not give the workmen an

opportunity to be heard and has thus violated the

principles of natural justice. That Party II has not

issued any Office Order dated 27-04-2011. That it was

not brought to the notice of the workmen or the

Union.

6. Heard arguments. The Learned Advocates for

the Parties have also filed their Written Arguments.

7. The following issues were framed by this

Tribunal and my findings thereon are as follows:-

Sr.

Issues

Findings

No.

Whether the Party I

In the negative.

proves that the action

of the Management in

reducing the employer’s

share towards Provident

Fund Contribution restricted

to the ceiling of wages of

Rs. 6,500/- for the period

from April, 2011 to August,

2015, is illegal and unjustified?

Whether the Party I proves

In the negative.

that the action of the Party II

in reducing the employer

contribution towards the

Provident Fund amounts to

violation of Section 9A of the

Industrial Disputes Act?

Whether Party I proves that

In the affirmative.

the Goa Milk Union Employees

Association has locus standi

to raise the dispute on behalf

of its workmen?

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

197

Whether the Party II proves

In the negative.

that the Order of Reference is

not maintainable as it is

related to the Employees

Provident Fund and

Miscellaneous Provisions

Act, 1952 which is a separate

Code with the separate

independent Authority

deciding all the issues

What Relief? What Award?

As per final order.

REASONS

8. The case of Party I is that the action of the

Management in reducing the Employer’s share

towards Provident Fund Contribution restricted to

the ceiling wages of Rs. 6,500/- for the period from

April, 2011 to August, 2015 is illegal and unjustified.

9. Party II has denied the same.

10. Party I has examined Shri Hemant Sawant as

Witness 1 for Party I. He is the General Secretary of

Goa Milk Union Employees Association.

11. Party II has examined Shri Priyesh Sawant as

Witness 1 for Party II. He is the Personnel Officer of

Party II.

12. It is the case of Party I that Party II was

contributing 12% of the gross basic wages towards

the Provident Fund of the workmen. Party II has

admitted the same.

13. It is the case of Party I that Party II with effect

from April, 2011 reduced its contribution to the

workers’ Provident Fund to the basic ceiling limit of

Rs. 6,500/-. Party II has admitted the same.

14. The Learned Advocate for Party II, Shri P.

Chawdikar states that such reduction in the

Employer’s contribution does not affect the condition

of service of the workmen. Shri P. Chawdikar has relied

on the law laid down in Vijayan V/s Secretary to

Government (2006) III LLJ 337 ker in support of his

case.

15. In Vijayan V/s Secretary to Government

(2006) III LLJ 337 Ker, the Hon’ble High Court of

Kerala has laid down the following principles. Firstly,

Employer’s contribution in excess of statutory limits

is only a gratuitous act. Secondly, reducing such

contribution to the statutory limit does not affect the

conditions of service of the workmen. Thirdly, notice

under Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

is not required to reduce the Employer’s contribution

to the statutory limit.

16. The Union Representative, Shri P. Gaonkar is

unable to show any case-law passed by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court or the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature at Bombay to the contrary.

17. Therefore the Management of Party II was

entitled to reduce the Employer’s contribution to the

Provident Fund of the workmen to the statutory

minimum. It does not affect the conditions of service

of the workmen.

18. Consequently, Party I has failed to prove that

the action of the Management in reducing the

Employer’s share towards Provident Fund

Contribution restricted to the ceiling wages of

Rs. 6,500/- for the period from April, 2011 to August,

2015, is illegal and unjustified. Hence, I hold Issue

No.1 in the negative.

19. Issue No. 2: The case of Party I is that the

action of Party II in reducing the Employer’s

contribution towards the Provident Fund amounts

to violation of Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947.

18. As seen above, it has been held in Vijayan V/s

Secretary to Government (2006) III LLJ 337 Ker,

that notice under Section 9-A of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 is not necessary to reduce the

Employer’s contribution to the statutory minimum.

As such Party I has failed to prove that the action of

Party II in reducing the Employer’s contribution

towards the Provident Fund amounts to a violation

of Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Hence I hold Issue No. 2 in the negative.

19. Issue No. 3: The case of Party I is that the Goa

Milk Union Employees Association has locus standi

to raise the dispute on behalf of its workmen.

20. The Goa Milk Union Employees Association

has raised the dispute and the matter had gone in for

conciliation before the Assistant Labour

Commissioner. Upon failure of conciliation being

reported to the Government, the Government has

referred the dispute to this Tribunal.

21. It is found that conciliation proceedings were

conducted with the participation of the Goa Milk

Union Employees Association. There is a presumption

that official acts are regularly performed. The

participation of the Goa Milk Employees Association

in the conciliation proceedings shows that the Asst.

Labour Commissioner had recognized the locus

standi of the said Goa Milk Union Employees

Association to represent the workers. There is

presumption arising out of such facts.

22. Priyesh Sawant (Witness 1 for Party II) has

deposed that Goa Milk Union Employees Association

has by its letter dated 13-05-2011 (Exh. 23 in cross)

raised objection to the action of the Management of

Party II. He deposes that Party II addressed their reply

198

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

dated 19-05-2011 (Exh. 24 in cross) giving

explanation. He further deposes that the Union by

its letter dated 22-08-2011 (Exh. 25 in cross)

requested to be provided with a copy of the letter

mentioned in the said letter. He deposes that Party II

thereafter provided a copy of letter dated 01-04-2011

of the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner to the

said Union.

23. The testimony of Priyesh Sawant (Witness 1

for Party II) shows that by corresponding with Goa

Milk Union Employees Association, Party II has

recognized the locus standi of Goa Milk Union

Employees Association. Now Party II cannot deny the

same.

24. For the reasons stated above, Party I has proved

that the Goa Milk Union Employees Association has

the locus standi to raise the dispute on behalf of its

workmen. Hence, I hold issue No. 3 in the negative.

25. Issue No. 4: The case of Party II is that the Order

of Reference is not maintainable as it is related to the

Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous

Provisions Act, 1952 which is a separate Code with

separate independent authorities deciding all the

issues.

26. Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

states that when service conditions mentioned in

the Fourth Schedule are proposed to be changed,

necessary notice should be given to the workmen.

27. Item No. 2 of the Fourth Schedule of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 speaks about

contributions paid or payable by the Employer to any

Provident Fund.

28. This clearly shows that disputes regarding

payments made to the Provident Fund can be

adjudicated under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Therefore, Party II has failed to prove the Order of

Reference is not maintainable as it relates to the

Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous

Provisions Act, 1952 which is a separate Code with

separate independent authorities deciding all the

issues. Hence, I hold issue No. 4 in the negative.

29. In Vijayan V/s Secretary to Government

(2006) III LLJ 337 Ker, it has been held that

Employer’s contribution to the Provident Fund in

excess of statutory limits is a gratuitous act.

Reducing it to the statutory limit does not affect the

conditions of service and does not require notice

under Section 9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

30. Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i)

The action of the Management of Party II in

reducing the employer’s share to the

Provident Fund contribution with effect from

April, 2011 to August, 2015 without

complying with the provisions of Section

9-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is

legal and justified.

(ii)

The workmen are not entitled to any relief.

(iii)

No orders as to costs.

Sd/-

(Anil Scaria)

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal

and Labour Court.

————

Notification

No. 28/02/2023-LAB/Part-II/305

The following Award passed by the Industrial

Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on

17-04-2023 in Ref. No. IT/33/2011 is hereby published

as required under Section 17 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 2nd May, 2023.

———

IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

AND LABOUR COURT

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

AT PANAJI

(Before Mr. Anil Scaria, Hon’ble Presiding Officer)

Ref. No. IT/33/2011

Shri Vassudev R. Kunkolekar,

House No. 348,

Muddavaddo, Saligao,

Bardez-Goa

.... Workman/Party-I.

V/s

M/s. Commscope India Pvt. Ltd.,

Verna Industrial Estate,

Verna, Salcete-Goa

.... Employer/Party-II.

Workman/Party I represented by Learned Advocate

Shri P. Naik.

Employer/Party II represented by Learned Advocate

Shri P. Chawdikar.

AWARD

(Delivered on this the 17th day of the month

of April of the year 2023)

By Order dated 08-11-2011, bearing No. 28/38/

/2011-LAB/451, the Government of Goa in exercise

of powers conferred by Section 10(1)(d) of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, has referred the

following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

199

“(1) Whether Shri Vassudev R. Kunkolekar, Shift

Leader, can be construed as a workman as per

Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

(Central Act 14 of 1947)?

(2)

If the answer to issue No. (1) above is in the

affirmative, then, whether the action of the

management of M/s Andrew Telecommunications

India Private Limited, Verna, Salcette-Goa, in

terminating the services of its workman

Shri Vassudev R. Kunkolekar, Shift Leader, with

effect from 15-04-2009, is legal and justified?

(3)

If the answer to issue No. (2) above is in the

negative, then, what relief the workman is

entitled to?”

2. Party I has filed his Claim Statement. Party II

has filed its Written Statement. Party I has filed his

Rejoinder to the Written Statement.

3. The case of Party I is that Party I joined

Party II as a “Trainee Operator” w.e.f. 01-07-2003.

That on 01-04-2006, he was designated as “Goods

Receiving Operator”. That on 14-09-2006, he was

designated as a “Shift Leader”. That Party II was

not complying with the mandatory provisions of

the Factories Act, 1947 regarding health, safety and

welfare. That Party I had joined a Trade Union to

press for his rights to a safe and healthy working

atmosphere. That on 27-06-2007, Party II issued a

Memo wherein false allegations were made against

Party I.

4. That on 12-01-2008, Party II suspended Party

I from service pending disciplinary proceedings.

That in the Suspension Letter dated 12-01-2008 it

was mentioned that he was entitled to subsistence

allowance as per Industrial Employment Standing

Order Act, 1946. That no subsistence allowance

was paid to Party I during the period of his

suspension. That by letter dated 15-04-2009 Party II

terminated the services of Party I. That along with

the Termination Letter, Party II also sent a cheque

for Rs. 68,904/- (Rupees Sixty eight thousand nine

hundred four only) towards the payment of legal

dues. That Party I accepted the said amount “under

protest”. That Party I is unemployed ever since his

termination from service. That the termination of

service of Party I is not legal and justified. Therefore,

it is prayed that Party I be reinstated in service

with full back wages, continuity in service and

consequential benefits.

5. The case of Party II is that Party I was working

as a “Shift Leader”. That Party I was working in the

supervisory cadre and is not a “workman”. That

the Factory of Party II is built with a state of the art

facilities providing good and healthy working

conditions to its workmen. It is denied that Party II

has not been complying with the mandatory

provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 with respect

to health, safety and welfare. That while Party I

was working as a “Shift Leader” he committed

certain acts of misconduct. That, on 27-06-2007,

Party II issued to Party I a Memo for his misconduct.

That on 12-01-2008, Party I was suspended from the

services of Party II. That Party I was not entitled to

subsistence allowance. That it was inadvertently

mentioned in the Suspension Letter dated

27-06-2007 that Party I was entitled to receive

Subsistence Allowance in accordance with the

Industrial Employment and Standing Orders Act,

1946. That, Party II terminated the services of Party I

by letter dated 15-04-2009. That Party II also sent a

cheque for a sum of Rs. 68,904/- (Rupees Sixty eight

thousand nine hundred four only) towards payment

of all legal dues of Party I. That Party I had accepted

the cheque under protest. It is denied that Party I

has been unemployed since the date of his

termination from services. That, Party I has been

gainfully employed ever since his termination from

services by Party II. Therefore, it is prayed that the

reliefs claimed by Party I be rejected.

6. In his Rejoinder to the Written Statement,

Party I claims to be a “workman”.

7. The following issues were framed by this

Tribunal.

1. Whether the Party I proves that he is a

workman u/s 2(s) of the I. D. Act, 1947?

2. Whether the Party I proves that Party II illegally

terminated his services with immediate effect

vide letter dated 15-04-09?

3. Whether the Party I proves that he is

unemployed from the date of his termination

till today?

4. Whether the Party II proves that it is

inadvertently mentioned in the suspension

letter dated 12-01-08 that Party I would be

entitled to receive subsistence allowance in

accordance with Industrial Employment

Standing Orders Act?

5. What relief? What Award?

8. During the course of proceedings, the Parties

filed an application dated 03-04-2023 for Award in

terms of Settlement (Exh. 58 Colly).

200

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

10. The terms of Settlement reads as follows:-

“I. That in the present matter it is agreed

between the Parties to settle the dispute

amicably for a composite amount of

Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three lakh fifty

thousand only) before this Court and

accordingly issued cheque/Demand Draft

dated 03-04-2023.

II.

The Party II herein have agreed to pay a sum

of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three lakh fifty

thousand only) in full and final settlement of

the entire claim amount of the Party I in the

present matter.

III. The Party I herein declares that his claim in

the present matter is conclusively settled.

IV. The Party No. I, Shri Vassudev R. Kunkolekar

state that he is having no claim of whatsoever

nature against the Party No. II/Employer and

that he does not wish to pursue to the present

reference and treat the said reference as

settled.”

11.

I have gone through the records of the case

and the terms of Settlement and I am

convinced that the consent terms filed by the

Parties are just and fair and are in the interest of

the Workman/Party I and the Employer/Party II and

therefore the same are accepted.

Hence, I pass the following order:-

ORDER

(i)

The reference in IT/33/2011 stands awarded

as per the terms of settlement filed by both

the Parties at Exhibit 58 Colly.

The terms of settlement are as follows:-

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

That in the present matter it is agreed between

the Parties to settle the dispute amicably for a

composite amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees

Three lakh fifty thousand only) before this

Court and accordingly issued cheque/Demand

Draft dated 03-04-2023.

II. The Party II herein have agreed to pay a sum

of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Fifty

Thousand Only) in full and final settlement of

the entire claim amount of the Party I in the

present matter.

III. The Party I herein declares that his claim in the

present matter is conclusively settled.

IV. The Party No. I, Shri Vassudev R. Kunkolekar

state that he is having no claim of whatsoever

nature against the Party No. II/Employer and

that he does not wish to pursue to the present

reference and treat the said reference as

settled.

(ii) No orders as to costs.

(iii) Inform the Government accordingly.

Sd/-

(Anil Scaria),

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal

and Labour Court.

————

Notification

No. 28/02/2023-LAB/Part-II/306

The following Award passed by the Industrial

Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on

17-04-2023 in Ref. No. IT/32/2011 is hereby

published as required under Section 17 of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of

1947).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Amalia O. F. Pinto, Under Secretary (Labour).

Porvorim, 2nd May, 2023.

———

IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND

LABOUR COURT

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

AT PANAJI

(Before Mr. Anil Scaria, Hon’ble Presiding Officer)

Ref. No. IT/32/2011

Shri Blasco John Fernandes,

House No. 289,

Navetim, Pilerne,

Bardez-Goa.

…..

Workman/Party-I

V/s

M/s. Commscope India Pvt. Ltd.,

Verna Industrial Estate,

Verna, Salcete-Goa.

…… Employer/Party-II

Workmen/Party I represented by Learned Advocate

Shri P. Naik.

Employer/Party II represented by Learned Advocate

Shri P. Chawdikar.

A WARD

(Delivered on this the 17th day of the Month

of April of the year 2023)

By Order dated 30-09-2011, bearing No. 28/39/

/2011-LAB/401, the Government of Goa in exercise

of powers conferred by Section 10(1)(d) of the

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

201

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, has referred the

following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:-

“(1) Whether Shri Blasco Fernandes, Shift Leader,

can be construed as a workman under

Clause(s) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947)?

(2) If the answer to issue No. (1) above is in the

affirmative, then, whether the action of the

management

M/s

Andrew

Tele-

-communications India Private Limited, Verna,

Salcette-Goa, in terminating the services of its

workman Shri Blasco Fernandes, Shift Leader,

with effect from 15-04-2009, is legal and

justified?

(3) If the answer to issue No. (2) above is in the

negative, then, what relief the workman is

entitled to?”

2. Party I has filed his Claim Statement. Party II

has filed its Written Statement. Party I has filed a

Rejoinder.

3. The case of Party I is that on 01-07-2003, Party

II appointed Party I as a “Trainee Operator”. That

on 01-04-2006, he was designated as “Goods

Receiving Operator”. That on 14-09-2006, he was

designated as a “Shift Leader”. That Party II was

committing breach of the mandatory provisions of

the Factories Act, 1947 relating to health, safety

and welfare. That Party I became an active member

of a Trade Union to press for the implementation of

the Factories Act, 1947. That on 03-07-2007, Party II

issued a Memo wherein false allegations were made

against Party I. That the Memo casts aspersions

and stigma on the conduct of Party I.

4. That on 12-01-2008, Party II suspended Party I

from service pending disciplinary proceedings. That

in the Suspension Letter dated 12-01-2008 it was

mentioned that he was entitled to subsistence

allowance as per Industrial Employment Standing

Order Act, 1946. That no subsistence allowance

was paid to Party I. That Party II terminated the

services of Party I by letter dated 15-04-2009. That

Party II also sent a cheque for Rs. 73,736/- (Rupees

seventy three thousand seven hundred thirty six

only) towards the payment of legal dues. That

Party I accepted the cheque under protest. That

Party I has been unemployed since 15-04-2009.

Party I prays that he be reinstated in service with

full back wages, continuity of service and

consequential benefits.

5. The case of Party II is that Party I is in the

supervisory cadre and is not a workman. That the

Factory of Party II is built with a state of the art

facilities to provide good and healthy working

condition for its workmen. It is denied that Party II

is not complying with the mandatory provisions of

the Factories Act, 1948. That Party I committed

certain acts of misconduct when he was working

as a “Shift Leader” which is a supervisory post. It

is admitted that on 03-07-2007 Party II issued a

Memo to Party I for his misconduct. That on

12-01-2008, Party I was suspended from service. That

in the Suspension Letter dated 12-01-2008 Party II

had inadvertently stated that Party I was entitled

to subsistence allowance under the Industrial

Employment Standing Orders Act, 1946. That Party

I was not entitled to subsistence allowance. That,

Party II terminated Party I from service by letter

dated 15-04-2009. That Party II had sent a cheque

of Rs. 73,736/- (Rupees seventy three thousand seven

hundred thirty six only) towards payment of all

legal dues of Party I. It is denied that Party I is

unemployed ever since his termination from service.

That, Party I is gainfully employed from the date of

his termination. Therefore, it is prayed that the

Claim of Party I be rejected.

6. In his Rejoinder to the Written Statement,

Party I denies that he was working in a supervisory

position and is not a “workman”.

7. The following issues were framed by this

Tribunal.

1. Whether the Party I proves that he is a

workman u/s 2(s) of the I. D. Act, 1947?

2. Whether the Party I proves that Party II

illegally terminated his services with

immediate effect vide letter dated 15-04-09?

3. Whether the Party I proves that he is

unemployed from the date of his termination

till today?

4. Whether the Party II proves that it is

inadvertently mentioned in the suspension

letter dated 12-1-08 that Party I would be

entitled to receive subsistence allowance in

accordance with Industrial Employment

Standing Orders Act?

5. What relief? What Award?

8. Party I and Party II adduced evidence in

support of their respective cases.

9. Thereafter, they filed an application dated

03-04-2023 for Award in terms of Settlement (Exh.

61 Colly).

202

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

10. The terms of Settlement reads as follows:-

“I. That in the present matter it is agreed between

the Parties to settle the dispute amicably for a

composite amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees

three lakh fifty thousand only) before this

Court and accordingly issued cheque/Demand

Draft dated 03-04-2023.

II. The Party II herein have agreed to pay a sum

of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakh fifty

thousand only) in full and final settlement of

the entire claim amount of the Party I in the

present matter.

III. The Party I herein declares that his claim in

the present matter is conclusively settled.

IV. The Party No. I, Shri Blasco John Fernandes

state that he is having no claim of whatsoever

nature against the Party No. II/Employer and

that he does not wish to pursue to the present

reference and treat the said reference as

settled.”

11. I have gone through the records of the case

and the terms of settlement and I am convinced

that the consent terms filed by the Parties are just

and fair and are in the interest of the Workman/

/Party I and the Employer/Party II and therefore the

same are accepted.

Hence, I pass the following:-

O RDER

(i) The reference in IT/32/2011 stands awarded

as per the terms of settlement filed by both

the Parties at Exhibit 61 Colly.

The terms of settlement are as follows:-

TERMS OF SETTLEMENT

I. That in the present matter it is agreed

between the Parties to settle the dispute

amicably for a composite amount of

Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakh fifty

thousand only) before this Court and

accordingly issued cheque/Demand Draft

dated 03-04-2023.

II. The Party II herein have agreed to pay a

sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakh fifty

thousand only) in full and final settlement

of the entire claim amount of the Party I in

the present matter.

III.

The Party I herein declares that his claim

in the present matter is conclusively settled.

IV.

The Party No. I, Shri Blasco John Fernandes

state that he is having no claim of

whatsoever nature against the Party No. II/

/Employer and that he does not wish to

pursue to the present reference and treat

the said reference as settled.

(ii)

No orders as to costs.

(iii) Inform the Government accordingly.

Sd/-

(Anil Scaria)

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal and

Labour Court.

———uuu———

Department of Museums

Directorate of Museums

–––

Order

No. 1/105/2005/-06/DM-357

In pursuance to Clause 5(2) of the Right to

Information Act, 2005, the following officials are

hereby appointed as Public Information Officer and

Assistant Public Information Officer at the Head

Office, for the Directorate of Museum to deal with

the application received from the public under

Right to Information Act, 2005.

1. Smt. Manisha G. Govenkar,

Public Information

Curator (Education),

Officer, Directorate

Tel. No. 2434406

of Museums.

2. Shri Sachin B. Bandodkar,

Assistant Public

Head Clerk,

Information Officer,

Tel. No. 2434406

Directorate

Museums.

The Public Information Officer shall be

responsible for the preparation and publication of

the manuals from time to time as per the said Act

and deal with the application received by her under

the Right to Information Act, 2005 on top priority so

as to furnish the information to the applicant within

the stipulated period and within the provisions of

the Act.

Upasana Mazgaonkar, Director (Museums).

Panaji, 28th April, 2023.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

203

Department of Personnel

–––

Order

No. 13/08/2023-PER/1261

Governor of Goa is pleased to grant extension in

service to Shri Sudhir A. Parab, Superintending

Engineer, Public Works Department beyond the

date of his superannuation for a period of one year

w.e.f. 01-05-2023 to 30-04-2024 in public interest.

The said extension in service is subject to vigilance

clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and

approval of Council of Ministers.

The extension is further subject to termination

without assigning any reasons at any time during

the period of extension.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 28th April, 2023.

————

Order

No. 13/09/2023-PER/1262

Governor of Goa is pleased to grant 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. The said

extension in service is subject to vigilance

clearance, concurrence of Finance Department and

approval of Council of Ministers.

The extension is further subject to termination

without assigning any reasons at any time during

the period of extension.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 28th April, 2023.

————

Order

No. 6/16/2012-PER(PF)/1314

On the recommendation of the Goa Services

Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order

transfer of the following Junior Scale Officer of Goa

Civil Service in public interest, with immediate

effect:-

Sr.

Name of the Officer &

Posted as

No.

present post

Kum. Prajakta D. Goltekar,

Deputy Chief

Deputy Director (Admn.),

Electoral Officer.

Agriculture

This is issued with the approval of the Election

Commission of India vide letter No. 154/Goa/2023-

P.Admn/6276 dated 13-04-2023.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 04th May, 2023.

————

Order

No. 6/5/2023-PER/1336

On the recommendation of the Goa Services

Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to post Smt.

Upasana Mazgaonkar, Selection Grade Officer of Goa

Civil Service as Member Secretary, Goa State

Commission for Women, in public interest, with

immediate effect.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 8th May, 2023.

————

Order

No. 5/23/2022-PER/1337

On the recommendation of the Goa Services

Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order

transfer of the following Junior Scale Officers of

Goa Civil Service, in public interest, with immediate

effect:-

Sr.

Name of the Officer

Posted as

No.

& present post

1. Shri Belwadi Samiullah

Deputy

Director

Nishat, awaiting

(Admn), Electricity.

posting

2. Shri Pankaj Rane,

Deputy Collector

awaiting posting

(DRO), South with

additional charge

of SLAO, WRD,

Gogol.

3. Shri Raju Dessai,

Forest Settlement

Member Secretary,

Officer, North.

Ravindra Bhavan,

Curchorem holding

204

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

additional charge of

Deputy Registrar, Goa

Engineering College,

Farmagudi

4. Shri Prakash Redkar,

Deputy Director

Deputy Director (Admn.),

(Admn.), PWD.

Electricity holding

additional charge of

Deputy Director (Admn.),

PWD

5. Shri Shubham Naik,

Deputy Registrar,

Deputy Collector (DRO),

Goa Engineering

South

College, Farmagudi.

6. Shri Mangaldas Gaonkar,

Forest Settlement

Forest Settlement Officer,

Officer, South.

North

Shri Yogiraj Prakash Gosavi, Deputy Director

(Admn.), Information Technology shall hold the

charge of Deputy Director (Admn.), Agriculture in

addition to his own duties.

Shri Manohar Lavu Karekar, Under Secretary to

the Hon’ble Minister for PWD, Law & Judiciary,

Legislative Affairs, Environment & Climate Change

holding additional charge of Chief Officer,

Curchorem Municipal Council shall also hold the

charge of Member Secretary, Ravindra Bhavan,

Curchorem 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, 8th May, 2023.

————

Notification

No. 5/1/2021-PER/1311

In pursuance to Rule 23 of the Goa Civil Service Rules, 2016, the Departmental Examination for the Junior

Scale Officers of Goa Civil Service mentioned in the enclosed annexure is scheduled from 24th to 26th May,

2023 at GIPARD, Ella Farm, Old Goa as per the schedule mentioned below:-

Date

Paper

Marks

Time

24-05-2023

Paper-I- The Goan Ethos, Basic

100

10.00 a.m.– 1.00 p.m.

Principles of Goa and General

Studies (without books)

24-05-2023

Paper-II- Legal Foundations of

100

2.30 p.m.– 5.30 p.m.

Government (with books)

25-05-2023

Paper-III- Legal Machinery of

100

10.00 a.m.– 1.00 p.m.

Government (with books)

25-05-2023

Paper-IV- Financial Management

100

2.30 p.m.– 5.30 p.m.

in Government (with books)

26-05-2023

Paper-V- Administrative Skill

100

10.00 a.m.– 1.00 p.m.

on Government (with books)

26-05-2023

Paper-VI- Contemporary issues

2.30 p.m.– 4.30 p.m.

in Governance (without books)

The Candidates shall report to the examination centre at GIPARD atleast 30 minutes before the

commencement of the examination on each day, along with a valid ID proof in original/or the ID Card

provided by GIPARD during the Departmental Training.

No mobile phones or any electronic gadgets will be allowed in the examination hall.

Each Candidate has to write only the seat number on his/her answer book/supplements (if any). No

other details or inscription/symbols or any description which can reveal the identity of the Candidate,

shall be made on the answer-book, etc. In such event, where the identity of the Candidate is revealed,

the answer-book shall not be assessed and the Candidate awarded NIL marks.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

205

No material in the form of books, notes, electronic

gadgets, etc. will be allowed in the examination

hall for the examination which are conducted

without books.

Books/reading material/class notes/powerpoint

presentations will be allowed to be taken in the

Examination Hall only for Paper II, Paper III, Paper IV

and Paper V. In case Candidates are carrying on

themselves the relevant books/reading material/

/classnotes/powerpoint presentations in electronic

form on laptops/tablets, then the Candidate shall

necessarily deposit the said laptop/tablet with the

Controller of Examination at GIPARD, for the purpose

of disabling all network connections, etc.

The Officer shall be declared passed in the

examination, if he/she secures a minimum of 45% of

the total marks in each paper.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 04th May, 2023.

————

ANNEXURE

Seat

Name of the Junior Scale Officer

No.

001

Smt. Sandra De Souza.

002

Smt. Asha Harmalkar.

003

Smt. Swati Dalvi.

004

Shri Alexio F. Vaz.

005

Shri Ravishekhar G. Nipanikar.

006

Shri Joao B. Fernandes.

007

Shri Pandurang T. Talgaonkar.

008

Shri Dinesh Pawar.

009

Shri Sohan Ashok Uskaikar.

010

Shri Gauresh Ashok Pilgaonkar.

011

Shri H. B. Khedekar.

012

Smt. Jyoti B. Dessai.

013

Shri Tulsidas S. Karanzalkar.

014

Shri Avit S. Naik.

015

Shri P. A. Parab.

016

Smt. Pratima J. Braganza.

017

Shri Milagres Soares.

018

Shri Shubham Mohan Naik.

019

Shri Ganesh Krishnakumar Barve.

020

Shri Yogiraj Prakash Gosavi.

021

Smt. Ashwini Vidwal Bhagat.

022

Shri Girish Gopal Sawant.

023

Shri Sitaram Gurudas Sawal.

024

Shri Manohar Lavu Karekar.

025

Shri Shreyas Dsilva.

026

Dr. Medora Eromilla D Costa.

027

Dr. Mriselda Velika Monteiro.

028

Shri Velton Peter Tellis.

029

Shri Prajeet Ramdas Chodankar.

030

Shri Vinayak Suresh Chari.

031

Ms. Diksha Namdev Tari.

032

Shri Suyash Vinayak Sinai Khandeparkar.

033

Kum. Vrushika Premanand Kauthankar.

034

Shri Himanshu Rajesh Patnekar.

035

Kum. Deepti Dharma Gaonkar.

036

Shri Ishwar Madan Madkaikar.

037

Shri Omkar Amar Asolkar.

038

Shri Naresh Gaude.

039

Shri Pankaj Rane.

040

Shri Belwadi Samiullah Nishat.

———uuu———

Department of Power

Office of the Chief Electrical Engineer

–––

Order

No. CEE/Estt-31-25-88/GPSC/Part/218

On the recommendation of the Departmental

Promotion Committee as conveyed by the Goa

Public Service Commission vide letter No. COM/II/

/11/16(1)/04/41 dated 13-04-2023, the Government

is pleased to promote Shri Jawahar S. Naik,

Assistant Engineer (Civil) to the post of Executive

Engineer (Civil), Group ‘A’ Gazetted in the Pay Matrix

Level 11 on regular basis with immediate effect.

2. He shall be posted as Executive Engineer

(Civil), Division XV, Patto, Panaji.

3. The promotee Officer shall be on probation

for a period of two years. He should exercise an

option for fixation of pay under F.R-22(1) (a)

(i) within one month from the date of promotion.

4. This issues with the approval of the

Government vide Inward No. 1453 dated 26-04-2023.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Stephen Fernandes, Chief Electrical Engineer &

ex officio Addl. Secretary.

Panaji, 03rd May, 2023.

206

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

Department of Public Health

–––

Order

No. 22/6/98-I/PHD/PF.I/633

Read: Order No. 22/6/98-I/PHD/PF.I/258 dated

16-02-2023.

Consequent upon promotion of Dr. Megha M.

Dalvi alias Megha Datta Kudchadkar, Medical

Officer to the post of Health Officer vide Order dated

16-02-2023 read in preamble, she is hereby posted

at Community Health Centre, Curchorem with

immediate effect.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 28th April, 2023.

———

Order

No. 44/46/2018-I/PHD/634

Government is pleased to accept the resignation

tendered by Dr. Sneha Volvoikar, Junior Radiologist

under Directorate of Health Services and to relieve

her from the post of Junior Radiologist under

Directorate of Health Services with effect from

06-04-2023 (b. n.).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 27th April, 2023.

———

Order

No. 5-10-2020-II/PHD/653

Whereas, Government vide Order No. 5/10/2020-

-II/PHD/1933 dated 18-11-2022, has constituted an

Expert Committee of the following members to study

and consider the views of all the stakeholders and

make recommendations to the Government as to

whether reservation is at all required at the Post

Graduation Level in Goa Medical College and to

what extent such reservation is required to be

provided for:- (i) Secretary (Health)—Chairperson, (ii)

Chairman, OBC Commission—Member, (iii)

President, Goa Medical Council—Member, (iv) Dean,

Goa Medical College—Member Secretary.

And whereas, the above Committee held a

meeting on 03-02-2023 and the Members of the

Committee after discussion has unanimously

decided to recommend implementation of

reservation for admission to Post Graduate courses

in GMC and also to seek legal opinion from office of

Advocate General, Government of Goa to

recommend the correct procedure to be followed to

give effect for reservation at the earliest for

admission at Post Graduate courses in GMC.

And whereas, the above recommendations of the

Committee was placed before the Chairperson of

the Committee and accordingly, Dean, Goa Medical

College & Hospital has been requested to take up

the matter with Ld. Advocate General for legal

opinion regarding the procedure to be followed to

give effect for reservation to Post Graduate courses

in GMC, as desired in the meeting.

And whereas the above Committee further held

a meeting on 6-04-2023 and following decision/

/recommendations were taken:-

i) All the members of the committee

unanimously decided to recommend

implementation of reservation for Post

Graduate courses in Goa Medical College as

per the Goa Government policy and

Directorate of Technical Education prospectus

i.e. 2% for SC, 12% for ST & 27% for OBC.

However, the required procedure for

implementation of reservation policy may be

executed by Government.

ii) All members agreed upon that the roaster for

reservation in Post Graduate courses in Goa

Medical College should be prepared by Social

Welfare Department.

iii) Goa Medical College to send the proposal for

reservation in Post Graduate courses to Public

Health Department for obtaining Government

approval.

And

whereas,

the

above

decision/re-

commendations of the Committee were placed

before the Government and the same were

accepted/approved by the Government.

Now therefore, Government of Goa hereby

implements the reservation for Post Graduate

courses in Goa Medical College as per the Goa

Government policy and Directorate of Technical

Education prospectus i.e. 2% for SC, 12% for ST &

27% for OBC. Government further directs Dean (Goa

Medical College & Hospital) to send the proposal

for reservation in Post Graduate Courses to Public

Health Department for obtaining Government

approval. The roaster for reservation in Post

Graduate courses in Goa Medical College should

be prepared by Social Welfare Department.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 5th May, 2023.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

207

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/

/12/14(2)/2013/34 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to declare satisfactory completion of

probation period of one year by Dr. Aniket Uday

Vaidya, Lecturer in Department of Oral Medicine

and Radiology under Goa Dental College & Hospital,

Bambolim and also to confirm him against the said

post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

–––––—

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD/677

On the recommendation of the Goa Public

Service Commission conveyed vide their letter No.

COM/II//12/14(3)/2023/37 dated 13-04-2023,

Government is pleased to declare satisfactory

completion of probation period of one year by Dr.

Jochima Eudora Cota, Lecturer and Dr. Poonam R.

Sawant, Lecturer in Department of Oral Pathology

under Goa Dental College & Hospital, Bambolim

and also to confirm them against the said post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

–––––—

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD/678

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/

/12/14(1)/2023/33 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to declare satisfactory completion of

probation period of one year by Dr. Godwin Savio

Clovis Da Costa, Lecturer, Dr. Kathleen Manuela

D’Souza, Lecturer and Dr. Mitalee Mopkar, Lecturer

in Department of Prosthodontics under Goa Dental

College & Hospital, Bambolim and also to confirm

them against the said post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD/680

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/

/12/14(2)/2023/35 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to declare satisfactory completion of

probation period of one year by Dr. Ruth Mary Nila

Lourenco, Lecturer and Dr. Clarence Pascoal Dias,

Lecturer in Department of Periodontics under Goa

Dental College & Hospital, Bambolim and also to

confirm them against the said post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

–––––—

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD/681

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/

/12/14(4)/2023/32 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to declare satisfactory completion of

probation period of one year by Dr. Mangesh Ashok

Kakodkar, Lecturer in Department of Orthodontics

under Goa Dental College & Hospital, Bambolim

and also to confirm him against the said post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

–––––—

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD/682

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/

/12/14(3)/2013/31 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to declare satisfactory completion of

probation period of one year by Dr. Edlyn Rodrigues,

Lecturer, Dr. Rakshit Khandeparker, Lecturer and Dr.

Rahul Kamat, Lecturer in Department of Oral and

Maxillofacial Surgery under Goa Dental College &

Hospital, Bambolim and also to confirm them

against the said post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

208

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 6

11TH MAY, 2023

Order

No. 4/3/2017-IV/PHD/683

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission conveyed vide their letter No. COM/II/

/12/14(1)/2013/36 dated 13-04-2023, Government is

pleased to declare satisfactory completion of

probation period of one year by Dr. Renita Savia

Soares, Lecturer and Dr. Beverley Mercy Themudo,

Lecturer in Department of Conservative Dentistry

and Endodontics under Goa Dental College &

Hospital, Bambolim and also to confirm them

against the said post.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

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

Porvorim, 05th May, 2023.

–––––—

Corrigendum

No. 25/12/2019-I/PHD/671

Read: Order No. 25/12/2019-I/PHD/106 dated 24-01-2023.

In the Government Order dated 24-01-2023 referred above, the details shown against Sr. No. 48 of

annexure in respect of Dr. Damodar alias Swapnil Arsekar, Junior Physician shall be substituted and read

as under:-

Name &

Date of

Present

Grade Pay

Date

Designation

joining

Grade Pay

to be made

of effect

applicable

under DACP

Dr. Damodar alias Swapnil

13-03-2013

G.P. Rs. 6,600/-

G.P. Rs. 7,600/-

13-03-2022.

Arsekar, Junior Physician

in PB-3

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

Gautami Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim, 8th May, 2023.

———uuu———

Department of Social Welfare

Directorate of Social Welfare

–––

Order

No. 58-9-97-BC-Vol.IV/5/645

Read:

Order No. 58-9-97-BC-Vol.IV/5/5929 dated

21-02-2019.

In observance of the Rule-9 of the SC/ST (POA)

Rules, 1995, the Government of Goa hereby

nominates Shri Gopal A. Parsekar, Additional

Secretary to Government of Goa as Nodal Officer for

co-ordinating the function of District Magistrate,

Superintendent of Police & authorized Officers

responsible for implementation of the provision of

the Act.

This supersedes the earlier Order issued in this

matter with approval of the Government 404/F

dated 19-04-2023.

Sandhya Kamat, Director (Social Welfare) & ex

officio Additional Secretary.

Panaji, 5th May, 2023.

www.goaprintingpress.gov.in

Published and Printed by the Director, Printing & Stationery,

Government Printing Press,

Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.

PRICE–Rs. 30.00

PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA—46/80—05/2023.

Department of Transport

Directorate of Transport

–––

Corrigendum

No. D.Tpt/EST/1997/(PF)2022/1186

Read: Notification No. D.Tpt/EST/1997/(PF)2022/

/680 dated 15-03-2023.

The name of Director on Board of Directors of

Kadamba Transport Corporation Limited appearing

at Sr. No. 2 may be read as “Shri Kritesh Naik

Gaunkar” instead of Shri Kritesh Gaonkar.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Rajan Satardekar, Director & ex officio Addl.

Secretary (Transport).

Panaji, 2nd May, 2023.