SERIES II No. 31

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410

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

Panaji, 1st November, 2024 (Kartika 10, 1946)

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

Department of Agriculture

Directorate of Agriculture

––

Order

No. 8/86/2024-25/D.Agri/895

Read:

Memorandum No. 8-86/2024-25/D.Agri/602

dated 29-07-2024.

On the recommendation of the Goa Public

Service Commission as conveyed vide letter No.

COM/I/5/2(1)/2022/102 dated 20-06-2024, the

Governor of Goa is pleased to appoint Shri

Shubham Jaywant Satardekar, Scheduled Caste,

reserved category against the post of Assistant

Agriculture Officer on regular basis to Group “B”

Gazetted under the Government of Goa, in the

Level-6 of the Pay Matrix in the 7th Pay

Commission and post him at the Zonal

Agriculture Office, Pernem. His pay will be fixed

in accordance with the Central Civil Service

Note:- There is one Extraordinary issue to the Official

Gazette, Series II No. 30 dated 24-10-2024 namely,

Extraordinary dated 29-10-2024 from pages

641 to 642 regarding Notifications from

Department of Finance.

(Revised pay) Rules, 2016 from the date of joining

the service.

The above candidate has been declared medically

fit by the Medical Board, Goa Medical College,

Bambolim-Goa vide their letter No. 4/105/

/85-H/GMC/2024/592 dated 30-08-2024. The

Additional District Magistrate, North Goa vide their

letter No. 2/48/2014-MAG/VCA/2599 dated

18-09-2024 stated that there is nothing adverse

reported against him at the concerned Police

Station and other Police Stations in Goa.

The candidate shall be on probation for a period

of two years with effect from the date of his joining.

The pay and allowances of the above candidate

shall be debited to the Budget Head: 2401—Crop

Husbandry; 00; 105—Manures and Fertilizers;

02—Manures and Fertilizers; 01—Salaries.

The above candidate shall join the duties within

a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of

this Order.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Sandeep B. Fol Dessai, Director (Agriculture) &

ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Tonca-Caranzalem, 23rd September, 2024.

—–––––—

Order

No. 2/9/95-AGR/2024-25/Part(II)/1036

On the recommendation of the Local Departmental Promotion Committee, the following Agriculture

Officers, Group ‘B’ Gazetted of this Directorate are hereby promoted to the post of Assistant Director of

Agriculture/Scientist (Agronomy/Horticulture/Plant Protection), Group ‘A’ Gazetted on officiating basis in

the pay matrix at Level-10 of the 7th Pay Commission with immediate effect until further orders or for a

period of one year or till the suitable candidate is available from the respective category, whichever is

earlier.

On promotion (officiation basis) they are posted as shown below:

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

643

644

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

Sr.

Name of the Officer

Present place of posting

Place of posting on promotion

No.

on officiating basis

Shri Satyavan K. Dessai

On deputation as Secretary at

To be continued on the post of

Goa Agricultural Produce and

Secretary, Goa Agricultural

Livestock Marketing Board,

Produce

and

Livestock

Arlem-Goa

Marketing Board, Arlem-Goa on

deputation.

Smt. Vaibhavi V. Desai

Agriculture Officer, District

Assistant Director of Agriculture

Agriculture Office (South), Margao (Crops), Crops & PP Section, Head

Quarter against the vacant post.

The officiating promotion will not bestow on the above Officers any claim for regular promotion and the

service rendered on officiating basis in the grade will not count for the purpose of seniority in that grade

for eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade.

This is issued with approval of Government vide entry No. 4976/F dated 10-10-2024.

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

Sandeep B. Fol Dessai, Director (Agriculture) & ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Tonca-Caranzalem, 14th October, 2024.

————

Order

No. 2/14/95/Agri(Part)/Vol.II/1048

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

Directorate as indicated below against their names with immediate effect:

Sr.

Name of the Officer

Place of present posting

Place of posting on transfer

No.

& designation

posting

Shri Sandesh Jiva Raut Desai

Zonal Agriculture Office,

As Agriculture Officer, District

Quepem as Zonal Agriculture

Agriculture Office (South),

Officer

Margao-Goa,

vice

Shri

Dattatraya M. Pandit being

transferred.

Shri Kirtiraj K. Naik Gaonkar

Government Agriculture Farm,

As Zonal Agriculture Officer,

Kalay, Sanguem, Goa as Farm

Zonal Agriculture Office,

Superintendent

Quepem vice Shri Sandesh Jiva

Raut Desai being transferred.

Shri Dattatraya M. Pandit

District Agriculture Office (South),

On deputation at Agriculture

Margao-Goa as Agriculture Officer

Technology Management Agency

(South), Margao, as Deputy

Project

Director,

thereby

relieving Shri Raghunath

Morajkar, Scientist (Plant &

Protection), Krishi Vigyan Kendra,

South from the additional

charge of Deputy Project

Director, ATMA, South

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

645

The deputation of Shri Dattatraya M. Pandit,

Agriculture Officer shall be initially for a period of

two years with effect from the date of taking over

the charge and shall be governed by standard terms

of deputation as contained in the O.M. No. 13/4/74-

-PER dated 12-02-1999 and amended from time to

time.

This is issued with approval of Government vide

entry No. 4643/F dated 03-10-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Sandeep B. Fol Dessai, Director (Agriculture) &

ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Tonca-Caranzalem, 16th October, 2024.

————

Order

No. 2/14/95/Agri(Part-I)/Vol.II/1078

Shri Mahendra U. Pagui, Assistant Agriculture

Officer, O/o. Government Agricultural Farm, Kalay,

Sanguem-Goa shall hold the charge of Farm

Superintendent, Government Agricultural Farm,

Kalay, Sanguem-Goa on transfer of Shri Kirtiraj B.

Naik Gaonkar, in addition to his own duties until

further orders.

He shall also exercise the powers of Drawing and

Disbursing Officer for the Office of Farm

Superintendent, Government Agricultural Farm,

Kalay, Sanguem-Goa.

He shall continue to draw his pay and allowances

against the post of Assistant Agriculture Officer,

Government Agricultural Farm, Kalay, Sanguem-

-Goa.

This is issued with approval of Government vide

entry No. 2169 dated 18-09-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Sandeep B. Fol Dessai, Director (Agriculture) &

ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Tonca-Caranzalem, 21st October, 2024.

————

Order

No. 2/14/95/Agri(Part-I)/1103

Government is pleased to order the transfer of

Shri Nilesh alias Madhavrao Daulatrao Khanvilkar,

Assistant Agriculture Officer (Group ‘B’ Gazetted),

Zonal Agriculture Office, Margao to the post of

Fertilizer Inspector under the Dy. Director of

Agriculture (INM) under the Budget Head:

2401—Crop

Husbandry;

00;

103—Seeds;

02—Agricultural Experiments & Research;

01—Salaries, by relieving Shri Satyavan K. Desai from

his additional charge of the said post.

Shri Khanvilkar shall also hold the additional

charge of Agriculture Officer (Extension) at Head

Quarter in addition to his own duties until further

orders.

This is issued with approval of Government vide

entry No. 2218 dated 10-10-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Sandeep B. Fol Dessai, Director (Agriculture)

& ex officio Jt. Secretary.

Tonca-Caranzalem, 24th October, 2024.

——————

Department of Co-operation

Office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies

––

Order

No. 219/Co-op. Awards/2023-24/Wing-II/H.O./RCS/2544

Read: 1) Notification No. 43/2/2001/TS/RCS dated

20-09-2001, published in Official Gazette,

Series I No. 28 dated 11-10-2001.

2) Notification No. 43/2/2001/TS/RCS dated

01-06-2010, published in Official Gazette,

Series I No. 11 dated 10-06-2010.

3) Notification No. 42/4/Award Scheme

(Amendment)/TS/RCS dated 18-08-2015,

published in Official Gazette, Series I No. 22

dated 27-08-2015.

4) Notification No. 42/4/Award-Scheme

(Amendment)/2022/RCS/2555 dated

21-10-2022, published in Official Gazette,

Extraordinary No. 3, Series I No. 29 dated

21-10-2022.

In accordance with Clause 5(1) of the Scheme for

Goa State Co-operative Award and Assistance

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Scheme’) notified vide

above read Notifications, the Government is pleased

to constitute the “Goa State Co-operative Awards

and Assistance Selection Committee” (hereinafter

referred to as ‘Selection Committee’) for selecting

and recommending the names for selecting the

Awardees in accordance with the Scheme taking

into consideration the performance till Co-operative

Year 2023-2024 as under.

646

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

Sr.

Name

Designation

No.

Shri Ulhas B. Phaldessai

Chairman.

Shri Vallabh Salkar

Member.

Shri Durgadas L. Gaude

Member.

Shri Samir Vasudev Morajkar

Member.

Shri Mahesh Krishna Naik

Member.

Dy. Registrar Co-op. Societies

Member

(Tech.)

Secretary.

The above Selection Committee shall function in

accordance with the provisions of the Scheme.

The Selection Committee shall recommend the

names of the individual as well Societies for their

excellence in the Co-operative field for the following

Awards.

1. Goa Sahakar Ratna.

2. Goa Sahakar Bhushan.

3. Goa Sahakar Shri.

4. Goa State Best Co-operative Society.

5. Goa State Consolation Award to Co-operative

Societies.

6. Assistance to individual in the field of

Co-operative movement.

These awards shall be for the work and

performance till Co-operative year 2023-24 ending

on 31-03-2024.

In terms of Clause 5(5) of the Scheme, the Deputy

Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Tech.), Office of

the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Patto, Panaji

shall function as the Member Secretary of the

Selection Committee and shall be responsible to

compile the data and the information received from

the individuals and Zonal Offices and place it before

the Selection Committee. He shall also assist the

Selection Committee in performing its functions and

maintain the records of the meetings.

The Chairman and the members of the Selection

Committee shall be entitled for travelling allowance

as provided under the Clause 5(4) of the Scheme

and honorarium as approved by the Government.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Arvind V. Bugde, Registrar (Co-operative Societies)

& ex officio Joint Secretary.

Panaji, October, 2024.

Department of Environment & Climate Change

––

Order

No. 2-120/2024/ENVT & CC/DIR/1245

Sub.: Constitution of the State Steering Committee

for Air Quality Monitoring for Goa (GOA-SSC).

Ref.: 1) NGT matter O.A No. 159 of 2021 (SZ) & I.A.

No. 47 & 48 of 2024 (SZ).

2) CPCB guidelines for formulation of State

Action Plan.

Whereas, as per the Hon’ble NGT in matter of

O.A. No 159 of 2021 (SZ) & I.A. No. 47 & 48 of 2024

(SZ), the Hon’ble NGT has directed the Central

Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to frame the common

guidelines for preparation of the State Action Plan.

Inorder to review the progress of implementation of

State Air Quality Monitoring Committee, the

Government hereby constitutes a committee as per

the direction of the Hon’ble NGT, with the following

members under the Chairmanship of Chief Secretary:

State Steering Committee for Air Quality

Monitoring for Goa (GOA-SSC):

Sr. No

Members

Designation

The Chief Secretary-Goa

Chairperson.

The Secretary (Urban

Member.

Development), Government

of Goa

The Secretary (Environment),

Member.

Government of Goa

The Secretary (Health),

Member.

Government of Goa

The Secretary (Public

Member.

Works Department),

Government of Goa

The Terms of Reference for State Steering

Committee for Air Quality Monitoring for Goa (GOA-

-SSC) are as follows:

The Steering Committee will review the progress

of implementation of State Air Quality Monitoring

Committee within 3 months of State Air Quality

Monitoring Committee meeting and review the same

and submit the report with status finding/

/recommendation to State Government for necessary

implementation with a copy to Central Pollution

Control Board and Goa State Pollution Control Board.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Johnson B. Fernandes, Director & ex officio Joint

Secretary (Environment & Climate Change).

Panaji, 24th October, 2024.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

647

Order

No. 2-120/2024/ENVT & CC/DIR/1246

Sub.: Constitution of the State Air Quality

Monitoring Committee (SAQMC).

Ref.: 1) NGT matter O.A No. 159 of 2021 (SZ) & I.A.

No. 47 & 48 of 2024 (SZ).

2) CPCB guidelines for formulation of State

Action Plan.

Whereas, as per the Hon’ble NGT in matter of

O.A. No. 159 of 2021 (SZ) & I.A. No. 47 & 48 of 2024

(SZ), the Hon’ble NGT has directed the Central

Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to frame the common

guidelines for preparation of the State Action Plan.

Inorder to prepare the State Action Plan, review

the progress, and implement the State Action Plan

and framing policy to the Government with respect

of Air Quality Management, hereby constitutes a

committee as per the direction of the Hon’ble NGT,

with the following members under the

Chairmanship of Secretary to Government

(Environment):

State Air Quality Monitoring Committee

(SAQMC):

Sr.

Members

Designation

No.

The Secretary to Government

Chairperson.

(Environment), Goa

The Director, Department

Member.

of Science, Technology and

Waste Management, Goa

The Director, Department

Member.

of Transport, Goa

The Director, Directorate

Member.

of Industries, Trade and

Commerce

The Director, Directorate of

Member.

Urban Development, Goa

The Director, Directorate of

Member.

Agriculture, Goa

The Managing Director,

Member.

Goa Waste Management

Corporation

The Director, Directorate of

Member

Panchayats, Goa

The Director, Department

Member.

of Environment & Climate

Change, Goa

10. Prof. Mukund Keshavrao

Expert

Deshmukh, Professor, BITS

Member.

Pilani, Goa Campus

11. Anita Bhagirathji Agrawal,

Expert

Associate Professor, BITS

Member.

Pilani, Goa Campus

12. Dr. Niyati Kalangutkar, Assistant

Expert

Professor, Goa University

Member.

13. The Member Secretary, Goa

Member

State Pollution Control Board

Convenor.

The Terms of Reference for the State Air Quality

Monitoring Committee (SAQMC) are as follows:

The Committee shall prepare the State Action

Plan with respect to Air Quality for the State.

ii.

The Committee shall meet once in six

months

and

review

the

status

implementation of the State Action Plan (SAP)

for controlling air and noise pollution.

iii. The Committee shall advice the Government

of Goa on Air Pollution Control and

management issues.

iv. The Committee shall bring up policy

intervention, mitigation measures for the

management of the better air quality in the

State of Goa.

The SAQMC shall bring emission reduction

target for the State of Goa in line with the

Government of India mandate.

vi. The Committee shall facilitate the new clean

energy projects and other financial incentives

to promote renewable energy and climate

resilience in the State of Goa.

vii. The policy brought forth by the committee

and action tackling air pollution should have a

direct positive impact on population health

(SDG 3). Building sustainable cities and

communities (SDG 11) relies on safe levels of

particulate matter pollution and also on

climate action (SDG 13).

viii. The Committee shall implement National

Emissions Trading System including various

national policies issued/notified by the Gol for

the promotion of clean air, sustainable

livelihood in the State.

ix. Strengthening the Air Quality Monitoring

Networks in the State of Goa.

648

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

The Committee shall advise in carrying out

the necessity of source apportionment studies

as required.

xi. The committee shall report to State Steering

Committee and submit the recorded minutes

within 7 days on completion of meeting.

All the non-official Members of the Committee

shall be entitled for Honorarium of Rs. 3500/- per

member per sitting which will be borne by Goa State

Pollution Control Board (GSPCB).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Johnson B. Fernandes, Director & ex officio Joint

Secretary (Environment & Climate Change).

Panaji, 24th October, 2024.

————

Order

No. 2-120/2024/ENVT & CC/DIR/1247

Sub.: Constitution of the District Air Quality Monitoring Committee (DAQMC) for North Goa and South Goa

District respectively.

Ref.: 1) NGT matter O. A No. 159 of 2021 (SZ) & I.A. No. 47 & 48 of 2024 (SZ).

2) CPCB guidelines for formulation of State Action Plan.

Whereas, as per the Hon’ble NGT in matter of O.A. No 159 of 2021 (SZ) & I. A. No. 47 & 48 of 2024 (SZ),

the Hon’ble NGT has directed the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to frame the common guidelines

for preparation of the State Action Plan. Inorder to assist the State Air Quality Monitoring Committee in

its activities and for implementation of the measures stipulated by State Air Quality Monitoring Committee,

the Government hereby constitutes committees as per the direction of the Hon’ble NGT, with the following

members under the Chairmanship of District Collector for North Goa and South Goa District respectively:

District Air Quality Monitoring Committee (DAQMC)-North Goa

Sr. No.

Members

Designation

The District Collector, North Goa

Chairperson.

The Superintendent of Police, North

Member.

The Superintendent of Police (Traffic)

Member.

The Deputy Director, Directorate of Industries and Commerce

Member.

The Deputy Director (Public Health), Directorate of Health Services

Member.

The Deputy Director, Directorate of Education, Goa

Member.

The Deputy Director of Panchayats, North

Member.

The Deputy Director of Higher Education

Member.

The Deputy Director of Transport, North

Member.

10.

Senior Engineer (S.E.) III, Public Works Department, North

Member.

11.

Senior Engineer (S.E.) IX, Public Works Department

Member.

12.

District Agricultural Officer (North)

Member.

13.

The Senior Town Planner (North), Town and Country Planning Department

Member.

14.

The Member Secretary, North Goa Planning Development Authority

Member.

15.

Mrs. Nandan Prabhudessai, Assistant Environmental Engineer, Goa

Member.

State Pollution Control Board

16.

The Deputy Collector (Revenue), North

Member.

17.

Dr. Mohan Girap, Scientist-C, Goa State Pollution Control Board

Member Convenor.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

649

District Air Quality Monitoring Committee (DAQMC)-South Goa

Sr. No.

Members

Designation

The District Collector, South Goa

Chairperson.

The Superintendent of Police, South

Member.

The Superintendent of Police (Traffic)

Member.

The Deputy Director, Directorate of Industries and Commerce, Goa

Member.

The Deputy Director (Public Health), Directorate of Health Services

Member.

The Deputy Director, Directorate of Education, Goa

Member.

The Deputy Director of Panchayats, South

Member.

The Deputy Director of Higher Education

Member.

The Deputy Director of Transport, South

Member.

10.

Senior Engineer (S.E.) IV, Public Works Department, South

Member.

11.

Senior Engineer (S.E.) IX, Public Works Department

Member.

12.

District Agricultural Officer (South)

Member.

13.

The Senior Town Planner (South), Town and Country Planning Department

Member.

14.

The Member Secretary, South Goa Planning Development Authority

Member.

15.

Mr. Pravin Faldessai, Assistant Environmental Engineer, Goa

Member.

State Pollution Control Board

16.

The Deputy Collector (Revenue), South

Member.

17.

Mrs. Jenica Sequeira, Scientist-D, Goa State Pollution Control Board

Member Convenor.

The Terms of Reference for District Air Quality Monitoring Committee (DAQMC) are as follows:

The DAQMC shall meet once in three months regarding the implementation of the Air Pollution

Control measures in the district and submit a report to the AQMC.

ii.

The Committee is responsible for day-to-day monitoring and implementation of Action Plan.

iii. The Committee shall be responsible for the progress of identified and entrusted activities and to

ensure effective implementation of Action Plan.

iv. The Committee shall plan the financial requirement for the implementation of the Action Plan.

To oversee all the action points mentioned in the action plan. The implementing departments are

appropriately tasked to deliver the results as expected.

vi. The Committee shall develop effective implementation and monitoring of Public Grievance Redressal

System pertaining to Air Pollution.

vii. The Committee shall implement measures to bring down the standards of the air quality within

the prescribed norms if it is in higher concentration and also shall take notable measures to maintain

better Air Quality in the regions with defined timeline.

viii. The DAQMC shall carry out various awareness activities to promote clean air and sustainable life

style.

ix. Air quality of the region shall be posted in the website of the office of the District Collector,

Municipalities, Science, Technology and Environment, Pollution Control Committee, Tourism for the

public information.

The Committee shall report to the State Air Quality Monitoring Committee and submit their recorded

minutes with clear defined timeline within 7 days of completion.

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

Johnson B. Fernandes, Director & ex officio Joint Secretary (Environment & Climate Change).

Panaji, 24th October, 2024.

650

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

Notification

No. 134-10-2015/ENVT & CC/DIR/1192

Read: 1) Notification No. 118-10-2015/STE-DIR/819

dated 18-11-2019.

2) Notification No. 118-10-2015/STE-DIR/65

dated 28-04-2021.

3) Notification No. 134-10-2015/ENVT&CC-

-DIR/1547 dated 17-02-2023.

Whereas, the Ministry of Environment, Forests

and Climate Change, Government of India vide

following notifications has notified an area around

the boundaries of the Wildlife Sanctuaries/National

Park/Bird Sanctuary in the State of Goa, as the Eco-

-sensitive Zone:

1. S.O. 221(E) dated 23-1-2015 declaring an area

with an extent of one kilometre of land or

the water body, whichever is near to the

Bhagwan Mahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary and

National Park in the State of Goa, as the Eco-

-sensitive Zone.

2. S.O. 615 (E) dated 25-1-2015 declaring an area

with an extent of one kilometre of land or

the water body, whichever is near to the

Bondla Wildlife Sanctuary in the State of Goa,

as the Eco-sensitive Zone.

3. S.O. 555 (E) dated 17-2-2015 declaring an area

with an extent of one kilometre of land or the

water body, whichever is near to the Netravali

Wildlife Sanctuary in the State of Goa, as the

Eco-sensitive Zone.

4. S.O. 607 (E) dated 24-2-2015 declaring an area

up to the river bank abutting the Dr. Salim Ali

Bird Sanctuary on the three sides of the said

Sanctuary and to the extent of 100 mtrs. on the

eastern side towards Chorao village from the

Sanctuary in the State of Goa as the Eco-

-sensitive Zone.

5. S.O. 608 (E) dated 24-2-2015 declaring an area

with an extent of one kilometre of land or

the water body, whichever is near to the

Cotigao Wildlife Sanctuary in the State of Goa,

as the Eco-sensitive Zone

6. S.O. 616 (E) dated 25-2-2015 declaring an area

with an extent of one kilometre of land or

the water body, whichever is near to the

Madhei Wildlife Sanctuary in the State of Goa,

as the Eco-sensitive Zone.

And whereas, the Central Government in the

Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate

Change has constituted a Committee called the

State Level Eco-Sensitive Zone Monitoring

Committee for effective monitoring of all notified

Eco-Sensitive Zones around the National Parks and

Wildlife Sanctuaries in the State of Goa vide

Notification No. S.O. 221 (E), dated 23rd January,

2015. The said Committee is also specified in para 5

of all aforementioned six notifications.

And whereas, the constitution of the

aforementioned State Level Eco-Sensitive Zone

Monitoring Committee for the State of Goa provides

that the Government of Goa shall nominate three

members in the Committee for a term of one year, as

indicated hereinbelow:-

i) one representative of Non-Government

Organisation working in the field of

environment (for a term of one year) —Member.

ii) one representative of Community Based

O r g a n i s a t i o n n o m i n a t e d b y t h e

S t a t e G o v e r n m e n t (for a term of

one year)—Member.

iii) one expert in Ecology from reputed Institution

or University of the State of Goa to be

nominated by Government of Goa (for a term

of one year)—Member.

Now therefore, in furtherance to the Notification

bearing S.O. 221 (E) dated 23rd January, 2015 and

para 5 of aforementioned six notifications issued by

the Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate

Change; the Government of Goa hereby nominates

the following persons to be members of the State

Level & Eco-Sensitive Zone Monitoring Committee

for a period of one year from the date of publication

of this Notification in the Official Gazette:-

1. Chief Secretary, Government — Chairman.

of Goa

2. Representative of the Ministry — Member.

of Environment, Forest

and Climate Change

3. Member Secretary, GSPCB

— Member.

4. Shri Savio J. F. Correira,

— Member.

Apartrnent-II, Mangor Hill,

Vasco-da-Gama—Representative

of Non-Government Organization

working in the field of environment

(for a term on one year)

5. Shri Pandurang Patil, Farmer, — Member.

President of Rivona, Rivona,

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

651

Sangem-Goa—Representative

of community based organization

nominated by the State

Government (for a term

on one year)

6. Dr. Sachin Tendulkar, CEO,

— Member.

Mineral Foundation of Goa,

Mining, Panaji-Goa—Expert in

Ecology from reputed Institution

or University of the State of Goa

(for a term on one year)

7. Principal Secretary, Environment, — Member.

Government of Goa

Secretary, Rural Development,

— Member.

Government of Goa

9. Secretary, Forest, Government

— Member.

of Goa

10.

Secretary, Agriculture,

— Member.

Government of Goa

11.

Secretary, Urban Development,

— Member

Government of Goa

12.

Secretary, Housing,

— Member.

Government of Goa

13.

Secretary, Ports,

— Member.

Government of Goa

14.

Secretary, Transport,

— Member.

Government of Goa

15.

Secretary, Revenue,

— Member.

Government of Goa

16.

Addl. Principal Chief

— Member

Conservator of Forest (WL)

Secretary.

& Chief Wildlife Warden,

Government of Goa.

Function of the SESZMC shall be as under:

a) The SESZMC shall monitor the compliance of

the provisions of Notifications declaring Eco-

-Sensitive Zones around National Park and

Wildlife Sanctuaries in the State of Goa

including this notification.

b) All activities that are covered under the

scheduled to the notification of the

Government of India in the Ministry of

Environment and Forest number S.O.1533 (E),

dated the 14th September, 2006, and are falling

within such Eco-Seasitive Zones as are notified

by the Central Government by issuing

notification in the Gazette of India in respect

of the National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries

in the State of Goa, except for the prohibited

activities specified in the table under

paragraph 4 thereof, shall be scrutinised by

the SESZMC based on the actual site-specific

condition and refer the same to the Central

Government in the Ministry of Environment,

Forest and Climate Change for prior environmental

clearance under the provisions of the said

notification.

c) All activities that are covered under the

schedule to the notification of the Government

of India in the Ministry of Environment and

Forest number S.O.1533 (E), dated the 14th

September, 2006 but are falling within such

Eco-sensitive Zones as are notified by the

Central Government by issuing notification in

the Gazette of India in respect of the National

Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in the State of

Goa, except for the prohibited activities

specified in the table under paragraph 4

thereof, shall be scrutinised by the SESZMC

based on the actual site-specific condition and

refer the same to the concerned regulatory

authorities.

d) The Member Secretary of the SESZMC or the

concerned Collector of the concerned park

in-charge shall be competent to file complaint

under Section 19 of Environment (Protection)

Act, 1996 against any person who contravenes

the provisions of this notification.

e) The SESZMC may invite representatives or

expert from concerned Department, Industry

Associations or concerned stakeholders to

assist it in its deliberations depending on the

requirements on issue to issue basis.

f) The SESZMC shall submit the annual action

taken report of its activities as on 31st March

of every year 30th June of that year to the

Central Government in the Ministry of

Environment, Forests and Climate Change as

per proforma given in Annexure IV.

g) The Central Government in the Ministry of

Environment, Forests and Climate Change may

give such directions, as it may deem fit, to the

SESZMC for effective discharge of its functions.

652

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

This supercedes earlier Notification No. 134-10-

-2015/ENVT & CC-DIR/1130 dated 09-10-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Johnson B. Fernandes, Director & ex officio Joint

Secretary (Environment & Climate Change).

Panaji, 18th October, 2024.

——————

Department of Forest

––

Order

No. 4/4/2024-FOR(PF)/232

The Government of Goa is pleased to post Shri

Harsh Damodar Phadte, appointed as Assistant

Conservator of Forest vide Order No. 4/2/2024-FOR/

/202 dated 04-09-2024 as Sub Divisional Forest

Officer, Canacona under Deputy Conservator of

Forest, South Goa Division, Margao.

Shri Harsh Damodar Phadte shall draw his salary

on the post of Sub Divisional Forest Officer,

Canacona with effect from the date of joining the

post of Assistant Conservator of Forest i.e.

09-09-2024 (b.n.).

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Dr. Pooja M. Madkaikar, Under Secretary (Forest).

Porvorim, 15th October, 2024.

——————

Department of Information and Publicity

––

Order

No. DIP/R. DAY–TAB.2025/2024/2583

Government is pleased to constitute a committee

under the Chairmanship of Hon’ble Chief Minister

comprising of the following in order to select the

design of tableau for presentation at Republic Day

Parade, 2025:

1. Chief Minister

—

Chairman.

2. Minister for Art & Culture

—

Member.

3. Chief Secretary

—

Member.

4. Secretary, Information

—

Member.

& Publicity

5. Principal Chief Engineer, PWD

—

Member.

6. Principal, Goa College of Art

—

Member.

7. Director of Art & Culture

—

Member.

8. Director of Accounts

—

Member.

9. Principal, Goa College of Music —

Member.

10. Jt. Director of Information

—

Member.

& Publicity

11. Director of Information

—

Member

& Publicity

Secretary.

The Committee will be entrusted with the

following works:

1. Scrutinize designs received from tableau

contractors.

2. Technical evaluation of the eligible bids based

on the information/detailing/concept/design/s.

3. Awarding of marks to the bids based on

criteria prior experience previous awards of

the bidders, presentation etc.

4. Supervise the fabrication of the float and

oversee the presentation.

This issues with the approval of Government

under U.O. No. 3646/F dated 30-08-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Dipak M. Bandekar, Director (Information &

Publicity) & ex officio Addl. Secretary.

Panaji, 19th September, 2024.

————

Notification

No. DI/INF/PAC/2019-21/4/3307

Read:

Notification No. DI/INF/PAC/2019/21-4/3191

dated 13-10-2022, published in the Official

Gazette, Series II No. 29 dated 20-10-2022.

The Government of Goa hereby extends the term

of Press Accreditation Committee constituted by the

above referred notification for a period of one year.

This issues with the approval of Government vide

U. O. 3331/F dated 22-08-2024.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Dipak Bandekar, Director, Information & Publicity

& ex officio Addl. Secretary.

Panaji, 22nd October, 2024.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

653

Department of Labour

––

Notification

No. 28/02/2024-LAB/Part-V/639

The following Judgment passed by the Labour

Court-II, at Panaji-Goa, on 23-04-2024 in Case No.

LC-II/LCC/04/2022 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, 15th October, 2024.

––––

THE LABOUR COURT-II

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

AT PANAJI

(Before Shri Suresh N. Narulkar, Hon’ble

Presiding Officer)

Case No. LC-II/LCC/04/2022

Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi,

H. No. 256/1, Varchawader Sal,

Bicholim-Goa (403503)

.... Applicant.

V/s

M/s. Power Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No. 58/A, Tuem Industrial Estate,

Tuem, Pernem-Goa (403512)

… Opponent.

Applicant represented by Ld. Rep. Shri P. Gaonkar.

Opponent represented by Ld. Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat.

Panaji, dated: 23-04-2024.

JUDGMENT

1. This Judgment and Order shall determine the

claim application of the Applicant dated

06-12-2022 filed u/s. 33-C (2) of I.D. Act, 1947.

2. By the present claim application, the Applicant

claimed an amount of Rs. 1,08,806/- towards his

unpaid salary.

3. The Opponent resisted the aforesaid claim

application of the Applicant by filing its reply dated

25-01-2023. The opponent, as and by way of its

preliminary objections, submitted that the

Applicant is not a “Workman” as defined under

Section 2(s) of the I.D. Act, 1947, that the claim

which is made in the application is not due to the

Applicant under a settlement or an award or under

the provisions of Chapter VA or Chapter VB of the

said Act and that the amount claimed is neither

payable to the Applicant nor it is a benefit given to

the Applicant.

4. The Opponent stated that the Applicant was

appointed as an “Executive” by them in H.R. in S4

Grade w.e.f. 21-05-2018 vide letter of appointment

dated 21-05-2018. The Opponent stated that the

Applicant being an Executive in H.R. Department

in Grade S4 is not a “Workman” as defined u/s 2(s)

of the said Act. The Opponent stated that in the

letter of appointment dated 21-05-2018 issued to

the Applicant, it has been clearly stated that the

Applicant shall drop a remuneration of Rs. 3,20,000/-

per annum CTC which is the cost the Company i.e.

the said remuneration includes the cost of

contribution of the Company to the Provident Fund,

Leave Bonus, Performance, etc. except gratuity. The

Opponent stated that the Applicant was given an

Annexure-I stating his monthly break-up of the

actual wages payable to him which are basic of

Rs. 6656/-, HRA Rs. 8126.50/- and Conveyance of

Rs. 8126.50/- and thus total of Rs. 22,908/-. The

Opponent stated that the amount of Rs. 32,000/-

mentioned in the letter of appointment is against

the variable component and is not the wages agreed

to be paid to the Applicant as claimed. The

Opponent stated that as per the break-up given in

the Annexure-I to the letter of appointment the

actual wages payable to the Applicant were

Rs. 22,908/- per month excluding the PF

contribution of the Opponent and the bonus. The

Opponent stated that the Applicant had accepted

the same and also accepted the wages paid to the

Applicant from May, 2018 onwards. The Opponent

stated that the Applicant had joined on 21-05-2018

and had thus worked for 11 days from 21-05-2018 to

31-05-2018. The Opponent stated that the

Applicant’s monthly salary was Rs. 22,908/-

excluding its share of PF contribution and the

bonus which was payable for 31 days of May, 2018.

The Opponent stated that as the Applicant has

worked for 11 days from 21-05-2018 to 31-05-2018

and was entitled to gross wage of Rs. 8129/- for 11

days and that after deducting the PF contribution

of the Applicant, the Applicant was paid net amount

of Rs. 7846/- for May, 2018. The Opponent stated

that the Applicant had not disputed the said

calculation and payment which was based on the

Annexure-I to the letter of appointment and has

accepted the same and no dispute was raised on

the same at any time till his resignation. The

Opponent stated that the Applicant was similarly

paid from June, 2018 to November, 2021 which was

accepted by him without any dispute. The

Opponent stated that the Applicant was paid the

654

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

said agreed salary from May, 2018 till November,

2021 and no dispute was raised on the same by the

Applicant at any time as he was aware that the

actual salary was Rs. 22,908/-. The Opponent stated

that the Applicant is not entitled to the claim made

in the present application. The Opponent stated

that without prejudice to the above, the Opponent

in reply to the application in Form K-3 denies that

the Applicant is entitled to the determination of

the amounts of Rs. 1,08,806/- claimed by him in the

said application. The Opponent stated that they

denies that the offered salary of the Applicant was

Rs. 3,20,000/- and the monthly salary was Rs. 26,667/- as

claimed. The Opponent stated that the salary of

Rs. 3,20,000/- per annum was the cost to the

Company and the same was not offered to the

Applicant as alleged. The Opponent stated that the

actual salary of the Applicant was Rs. 22,908/- per

month and the amount of Rs. 799/- and Rs. 292/-

were the Employer’s share of the PF and Bonus

payable to the Applicant as per Payment of Bonus

Act, 1965. The Opponent denies that the Applicant

is entitled to the difference of Rs. 2667/- per month

w.e.f. 01-07-2018 to 24-11-2021. The Opponent

therefore prayed that the claim application is not

maintainable and be dismissed with cost.

5. Thereafter, the Applicant filed his rejoinder on

13-02-2023 at Exb. 06. The Applicant, as and by way

of his re-joinder, confirms and 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

Opponent in their Written Statement, which are

contrary to the statements and averments made by

him. He stated that though he was designated as

Executive HR, his primary duties were of Clerk in

HR Dept. and he was doing the work to physically

prepare and feed the salary of the workmen in

software and forwarding it to General Manager-HR

and Accounts Manager for payment, physically

preparing the joining and relieving formalities of

workmen as per the instructions and direction of

General Manager-HR, physically preparing the filing

PF and ESIC returns by taking Password, OTP from

HR Manager & Accounts Manager, filing forms of

Factory License Renewal, factory yearly returns,

factory half yearly returns, Labour Welfare Returns

and submitting it to HR Manager for signature and

then submitting it in Government offices, checking

of contract labour bills and forwarding the bills to

Accounts Manager for payment, physically carrying

out clerical work of HR Department. He submitted

that his primary duty was clerical in nature and he

has no supervisory or managerial powers to

represent the Company.

6. Based on the pleadings filed by the Party

hereinabove, this Hon’ble Court framed certain

issues on 03-07-2023 at Exb. 10

1. Whether the Applicant proves that he is the

Workman as defined u/s 2(s) of the I.D. Act,

1947?

2. Whether the Applicant proves that he is entitled

to receive from the Opponent an amount of

Rs. 1,08,806/- towards his unpaid salary?

3. Whether the Opponent proves that the

present claim application filed by the

Applicant is not maintainable in view of the

reasons stated in at para 2 (b & c) of the

written statement?

4. What Order?

7. My answers to the aforesaid issues are as

under:

Issue No. 1 : In the affirmative.

Issue No. 2 : In the affirmative.

Issue No. 3 : In the negative.

Issue No. 4 : As per final order.

Ld. Rep. Shri P. Gaonkar appearing for the

Workman as well as Ld. Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat

representing the Employer chose to file synopsis of

written argument. I have carefully perused the

entire records of the present case including the

synopsis of written argument filed by both the

parties. I have carefully considered the submissions

made in the written synopsis filed by both the

parties.

REASONS

8. Issue No. 1: The Opponent as and by way of

its preliminary objections, submitted that the

Applicant is not a Workman as defined u/s 2(s) of

the I. D. Act, 1947. The burden was therefore cast on

the Workman to prove the same. Section 2(s) of the

I.D. Act defines the term “Workman” and it reads as

u/s 2(s) of the I. D. Act, 1947 has defined the term

of “workman” and as such it is necessary to read

the section as under:

9. Section 2 (s) of the I.D. Act, 1947 defines the

term ‘workman’ and it means “any person (including

an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any

manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational,

clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward,

whether the terms of employment be expressed or

implied and for the purposes of any proceedings

under this act in relation to an industrial dispute,

includes any such person who has been dismissed,

discharged or retrenched in connection with or a

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

655

consequence of that dispute or dismissal, discharge

or retrenchment has led to that dispute, but does not

include any such person.

(1) who is subject to the AIR Force Act, 1950 (45

of 1950) or the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950) or

the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957) or

(2) who is employed in the police service or as

an Officer or other employee of a prison or

(3) who is employed mainly in a managerial or

administrative capacity

(4) who, being employed in a supervisory capacity

draws wages exceeding Rs. 1,600/- per month

or exercises either by the nature of the duties

attached to the office or by reason of the

powers vested in him, functions mainly of a

managerial nature.”

10. In the case of H. R. Adyanthaya v/s Sandoz

(1) Ltd. reported in 1994 (69) FLR 593 the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India held that a person claiming

to be a “Workman” under the I. D. Act, 1947 must

show that he was employed to do the work of any

of the category which of manual, unskilled, skilled,

technical, operational, clerical or supervisory and

that is not enough that he was not covered by either

of the four exceptions to the definition of the

Workman.

11. In the case of Management of M/s Sonepate

Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. v/s Ajit Singh

reported in 2005 LAB IC 1315, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India observed that the question as to

whether the Employee has been performing a

clerical work or not is required to be determined

upon arriving at the findings as regards the

dominant nature of duty with a view to give effect

to the expression to do “any manual, unskilled,

skilled, technical, operational, clerical or supervisory

work”, the job of the concerned employee must fall

within one or other category thereof. It would

therefore not be correct to contend that merely

because the employee had not been performing any

managerial or supervisory duties, ipso facto, he

would be a Workman” .

12. In the case of Bhatiya General Hospital and

anr, (Supra), the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in

para 16 and 18 observed as under:

“16. The definition of “workman” under Section 2(s)

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is of wide

amplitude. Four classes of employees are,

however, specifically excluded from the

definition of workman. An employee who is

employed, mainly in a managerial or

administrative capacity or the one who is

employed in a supervisory capacity, draws

wages exceeding Rs. 10,000/- per month or

exercises, either by nature of the duties

attached to the office or by reason of the

powers vested in him, functions mainly of a

managerial nature is, inter alia, excluded from

the definition of workman. The use of the term,

“mainly” underscores the dominant nature of

the duty so as to fall outside the protective

umbrella of the labour legislation. By its very

nature, the question as to whether an

employee is a workman or not is rooted in

facts”.

“18.This being the nature of the definition of

workman, the nomenclature of the post held

by an employee is not of decisive significance.

It is in the nature of the duty and not the

nomenclature of the position that matters.

Whether the overall consideration of the duty

performed by the employee satisfies the

description of the duties being either

supervisory or mainly managerial nature, is

the question to be posed.”

The principle laid down by the Hon’ble High

Court of Bombay in its aforesaid case is well

established and also applicable to the case in hand.

13. In the case of Gwalior Investment Co.

Pvt, Ltd., (Supra) the Hon’ble High Court of

Bombay in para 7 of its judgment held as under:

7………… Irrespective of the wages paid, the test

to determine whether a person is a workman or not

is laid down by the Supreme Court in A. G. Raj

Rao v. Ciba Giegy of India Ltd., Bombay, the

Supreme Court has held”:

“Whether a particular employee is a workman

within the meaning of the expression as defined in

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

person employed in a supervisory capacity the test

that one must employ is what was the primary, basic

or dominant nature of duties for which the person

whose status is under enquiry was employed. A few

extra duties would hardly be relevant to determine

his status. The words like managerial or supervisory

have to be understood in their proper connotation

and their mere use should not detract from the truth.

The definition of the expression workman clearly

shows that the person concerned would not cease to

be a workman if the performs some supervisory duties

but he must be a person who must be engaged in a

supervisory capacity.”

14. Thus, in order to prove that the Party-I was a

“Workman” as defined u/s 2(s) of the I. D. Act, 1947,

the Party-I has to prove that he was performing the

656

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

duties of manual, unskilled, skilled, technical, operational,

clerical or supervisory work. It is well settled law

that whether a person is a ‘workman’ or not as

defined u/s 2 (s) of the I. D. Act, 1947 has to be

decided on the basis of the predominant nature of

duties performed by concerned person at the

relevant time, it cannot lay down any straight jacket

formula.

15. In the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd. v/s. Sunita

B. Vatsaraj (SMT), reported in 2007 II CLR 650 the

Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of

Bombay held that “mere designation or

nomenclature of the post not determinative of the

duties performed by the Employer. The Hon’ble High

Court further held that the term supervision means

direction and control. The concerned employee must

have a power to supervise, direct and control the

work of another employee or employees working

under him.”

16. In the case of Vinayak Baburao Shinde v/s. S.

R. Shinde and ors., reported in 1985 I CLR 318,

the Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay

observed as under:

The word “supervisor” means to oversee, that is to

look after the work done by other persons. The

word ‘supervision’ occurring in Section 2(s) of the

Industrial Disputes Act means supervision in

relation to work or in relation to persons. The

essence of supervision consists in overseeing by

one person over the work of others. This also

involves a power in the person overseeing to direct

and control the work done by the persons over

whom he is supervising. In an industrial

establishment normally there are three layers of

work. One is the clerical or the manual work which

is done by the workmen, the second is the

supervisory work done by a supervisor, and at a

higher level is the work of a manager. The last

mentioned officer is normally in a position to give

orders and to see that the work is done. He has

got powers to lay down the norms and to direct

that the work shall be done in accordance with

those norms. He has also, naturally, the power to

take disciplinary action and in case where

applications for leave are made it is within his

power to sanction or reject those applications.

A supervisor is distinguished from a manager in

as much as he has no powers to command others to

do a particular work. His function is to see that the

work is done in accordance with the norms laid down

by the management. If the work is done, he has to

assist the workmen to do it correctly in accordance

with the norms. If, however, a workman does not to

do the work correctly or properly, the supervisor has

no power to take any disciplinary action. In the case

of leave applications, a supervisor can only

recommend them and not sanction or reject them,

the latter being within the jurisdiction of a manager.”

17. In the case of John Joseph Khokar v/s R. S.

Bhadange & ors, reported in 1997 II CLR 921, the

Hon’ble High Court of Bombay held as under:

“The position that emerges from the aforesaid

discussion is that in determining the question

whether a person employed by the employer is

workman under Section 2(s) of the I. D. Act or not,

the court has principally to see main or substantial

work for which the employee has been employed

and engaged to do. Neither the designation of the

employee is decisive nor any incidental work that

may be done or required to be done by such

employee shall get him outside the purview of

workman, if the principal job and the nature of

employment of such employee is manual, technical

or clerical. In hierarchy of employees, some sort of

supervision by the employee over the employees of

the lower ladder without any control may not be

itself be sufficient to bring that employee in the

category of supervisor, yet if the principal job of

that employee is to oversee the work of employees

who are on the lower cadre of the hierarchy and

he has some sort of independent discretion and

judgment, obviously such employee would fall

within the category of supervisor. Each case would

depend on the nature of duties predominantly or

primarily performed by such employee and

whether such function was supervisory or not

would have to be decided on facts keeping in

mind correct principles where the employee

possess power of assigning duties and

distribution of work such authority of the

employee may be indicative of his being supervisor

doing supervision. In a broad sense supervisor is

one who has authority of the employee may be

indicative of his being supervisor doing

supervision. In a broad sense supervisor is one

who has authority over others. Someone who

superintends and direct others. An employee who

in the interest of the employer has responsibility

to direct control the work done by the other

workers and if the work is not done correct to

guide them to do it correctly in accordance with

norms shall certainly be a supervisor. A

supervisory work may be contradistinguished

from managerial and administrative work and, so

also a supervisor from manger and administrative

work. Supervisor’s pre-dominant function is to see

that work is done by the workers under him in

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

657

accordance with the norms laid down by the

management, he has no power to take any

disciplinary action”.

18. In the case of Tanojkumar B. Chatterji v/s

Solapur Municipal Corporation, Solapur, reported

in 2004 (2) L.L.N. 566, the Hon’ble High Court of

Bombay in para 5 of its judgment held as under:

“5. Now it is well-settled in this branch of law, as

in many others, that designations are not dispositive.

The court has to have due regard to the real nature

of duties and functions. In so far as a supervisor is

concerned, he or she is one who can bind the

employer by taking some kind of decision on his

behalf.

19. National Engineering Industries Ltd. v/s Sri

Kishan Bhageria [1988 (1) L.L.N. 675]. A supervisor

is one who has authority over others to superintend

and direct. A supervisor may possess the authority

to hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, promote,

discharge, assign, reward or discipline other

employees, or the responsibility to direct them or to

adjust their grievances or effectively to recommend

such action. The work of a supervisor is

distinguished from work which is of a clerical nature

by the exercise of independent judgment. The

decisions of the Supreme Court as well as of this

court have been considered in a judgment of Shri

Justice Rebello, speaking for this court, in Union

Carbide (India) Ltd v/s. D. Samuel and others [1999 (2)

L.L.N.

165].

The

Bombay

Dyeing

and

Manufacturing Company Ltd. v/s. R.A. Bidoo and

Others [1989 (2) L.L.N. 483] Division Bench of this

court held that “a supervisor is an overseer. A

person can be said to be a supervisor if there are

persons working under him over whose work he has

to keep a watch. A supervisor is empowered to take

corrective steps if a subordinate errs in work

assigned to him.

20. In the case of Anand Regional Co-op. Oil

Seeds Growers Union Ltd. v/s. Shailesh Kumar

Harshadbhai Shah, reported in (2006) 6 SCC 548,

the Hon’ble Apex Court in para 15 explained the

term ‘supervision’ as under:

“15. Supervision contemplates direction and

control. While determining the nature of the work

performed by an employee, the essence of the matter

should call for consideration. An undue importance

need not be given for the designation of an employee,

or the name assigned, to, the class to which he

belongs. What is needed to be asked is as to what are

the primary duties he performs. For the said purpose,

it is necessary to prove that there were some persons

working under him whose work is required to be

supervised. Being in charge of the section alone and

that too it being a small one and relating to quality

control would not answer the test.”

21. In the case in hand, the evidence on record

indicates that the Applicant was appointed as

Executive-HR in S4 Grade. As an Executive HR in S4

Grade, his primary duties and responsibilities were

to physically prepare and feed the salary of the

workmen in software and forwarding it to General

Manager-HR and Accounts Manager for payment,

physically preparing the joining and relieving

formalities of workmen as per the instructions and

direction of General Manager-HR, physically

preparing the filing PF and ESIC returns by taking

Password, OTP from HR Manager & Accounts

Manager, filing forms of Factory License Renewal,

factory yearly returns, factory half yearly returns,

Labour Welfare Returns and submitting it to HR

Manager for signature and then submitting it in

Government offices, checking of contract labour

bills and forwarding the bills to Accounts Manager

for payment, physically carrying out clerical work

of HR Department. In cross examination, he was

shown certain emails which he used to send the

said emails to the Labour Commissioner as well as

certain authorities. Thus, the primary duties and

responsibilities of the Applicant were clerical in

nature and as such, the Applicant is a “Workman”

as defined u/s 2(s) of the I. D. Act. Hence it is held

that the Applicant proves that he is the Workman

as defined u/s 2(s) of the I.D. Act, 1947.

22. Issue No. 2: The Applicant was issued an

appointment letter dated 21-05-2018 at Exb. 14.

Clause 15 of the said appointment letter issued to

the Applicant at Exb. 14 states that the Applicant

shall drop a remuneration of Rs. 3,20,000/-/CTC per

annum out of which Rs. 32,000/- per annum is

variable components. The sole witness of the

Employer Shri Manguesh Dalvi in his oral evidence

stated that the Applicant shall draw a remuneration

of Rs. 3,20,000/- per annum CTC and that the

Annexure-I issued to the Applicant showed the

monthly break-up of the actual wages payable to

the Applicant are basic of Rs. 6,656/-, HRA of

Rs. 8,126.50/- and Conveyance of Rs. 8,126.50/- Total

of Rs. 22,908/-. In his cross examination, he also

admitted that the Clause 15 of the Appointment

letter issued to the Applicant shows the

remuneration of the Applicant was fixed at

Rs. 3,20,000/-/CTC per annum and out of which

Rs. 32,000/- per annum is variable components. The

sole witness of the Opponent admitted that the

Opponent has paid to the Applicant an amount of

Rs. 2,88,000/- per annum and the Opponent has not

paid an amount of Rs. 32,000/- per annum to the

658

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

Applicant till date. Thus, the Opponent is liable to

pay to the Applicant a sum of Rs. 1,08,806/- i.e. from

July 2018 till 24-11-2021. Hence it is held that the

Applicant proves that the he is entitled to receive

from the Opponent an amount of Rs. 1,08,806/-

towards his unpaid salary. The issue No. 2 is

therefore answered in the affirmative.

23. Issue No. 3: The Opponent, as and by way of

preliminary objection in the written statement

submitted that the Applicant is not a Workman as

defined under Section 2(s) of the I. D. Act, 1947, that

the claim which is made in the application is not

due to the Applicant under a settlement or an award

or under the provisions of Chapter VA or Chapter

VB of the said Act in that the amount claimed is

neither payable to the Applicant nor it is the

benefits given to the Applicant. The burden to prove

is on the Opponent.

While deciding the issue No. 1 hereinabove, I,

have discussed and come to the conclusion that the

Applicant is Workman within the meaning of

Section 2(s) of the I. D. Act, 1947.

24. Ld. Adv. Shri P. J. Kamat representing the

Opponent in his written synopsis stated that the

claim of variable components is neither an admitted

claim nor existing claim and as such application

u/s 33 C 2 of the said Act is not maintainable and

relied upon a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India in the case of State Bank of India V/s. Ram

Chandra Dube & ors reported in 2001, LIC 79.

The judgment relied upon by Ld. Adv. Shri P. J.

Kamat representing the Opponent is not applicable

to the case in hand. He also relied upon a judgment

of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bombay

Chemical Industries V/s. Deputy Labour

Commissioner & anr. reported in 2022 II CLR 503.

The said judgment is also not applicable to the

case in hand.

Hence, it is held that the Applicant failed to

prove that the claim application, filed by the

Applicant is not maintainable in view of above

reasons stated in para 2 (b & c) of the written

statement. The Issue No. 3 is therefore answered in

the negative.

Thus, the Opponent was supposed to pay the

said amount of Rs. 1,08,806/- in the year June, 2018

till November, 2021. The Opponent is therefore liable

to pay the said amount of Rs. 1,08,806/- to the

Applicant along with interest @ 9% per annum from

the date of its maturity till its actual realization.

In view of above, I pass the following Order:

ORDER

The claim application of the Applicant dated

06-12-2022 is hereby granted. Consequently, the

Opponent is hereby directed to pay to the

Applicant a sum of Rs. 1,08,806/- along with interest

@ 9% per annum from the date of its maturity till its

actual realization.

Pronounced in the Open Court.

Sd/-

(Suresh N. Narulkar),

Presiding Officer,

Labour Court-II.

————

Notification

No. 28/02/2024-LAB/Part-I/617

The following Award passed by the Industrial

Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on

18-09-2024 in Ref. No. IT/03/19 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, 7th October, 2024.

––––

IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND

LABOUR COURT

GOVERNMENT OF GOA

AT PANAJI

(Before Mrs. Vijayalaxmi Shivolkar, Presiding Officer)

Ref. No. IT/03/19

Workmen,

Rep. by the President,

Mapusa Urban Co-op. Bank

Employees Union, 3rd Floor,

Dr. Dada Vaidya Road,

Panaji-Goa (403001). .... Workmen/Party-I.

V/s

M/s. Mapusa Urban Co-op. Bank of Goa Ltd.,

Reg. Office, “Nandadeep”,

Mapusa, Bardez-Goa (403507) .… Employer/Party II.

Workmen/Party I represented by Shri Subhash Naik

Jorge.

Employer/Party II represented by Ld. Adv. S. B. S.

Bangui.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

659

AWARD

(Delivered on this the 18th day of the month of

September of the year 2024)

By Order dated 09-04-2019, bearing No. 28/24/

/2018-LAB/263, the Government of Goa in exercise

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

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short The Act),

(Central Act 14 of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as

the “said Act”), the existing dispute between the

management of M/s. Mapusa Urban Co-operative

Bank of Goa Ltd., Mapusa-Goa and its Workmen

representative by Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank

Employees Union, for adjudication to the Industrial

Tribunal of Goa at Panaji-Goa, constituted under

Section 7-A of the said Act. The Schedule of

reference pertaining to charter of demands is as

under:

SCHEDULE

(1) Whether the action of the management of

M/s. Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank of Goa

Limited, Mapusa, Goa in refusing to consider

the following demands raised vide letter dated

11-04-2015 by the employees represented by

Mapusa Urban Co-operative Bank Employees

Union, is legal and justified?.

CHARTER OF DEMANDS

1. Wage Rise: The Union demanded that all the

members shall be granted a wage rise of 30% on

gross wages for clerks and 35% wage rise on gross

wages for sub staff w.e.f. 01-04-2015 which shall be

distributed under the heads given here below from

Serial No. 2 to Serial No. 13.

2. Basic Pay: The Union demanded that the

existing Basic Pay Scales of the members be revised

after merging DA of 4440 points (Base 1960 100) into

basic Pay and revising the same by 20% for Clerks/

/typist and 25% for sub staff. The new Basic Pay

Scales arrived at is as follows:

(a) Assistant Clerks : 10013-528/3-11598-798/

/2-13991-1057/1-15048-1585/

/4-21390-1845/3-26924-2114/

/4-35380-2642/2-40664

(b) Clerical Grade

: 11070-528/3-12655-798/

/3-15048-1057/1-16105-1585/

/4-22-1845/3-27981-2114/

/4-36437-2642/5-49107

(e) Typist Grade

: 11070-528/3-12655-798/

/3-15048-1057/1- 16105-1585/

/4-22447-1845/3-27981-

-2114/5-38551-2642/7-57045

(d) Sub Staff

: 9699-350/5-11451-490/

/5-13903-631/4-16425-771/

/1-17196-767/2-18730-1041/

/1-19771-1111/5-25356

3. Dearness Allowance: The Union demanded that

with effect from 01-04-2015, DA be paid at 100%

neutralization above 4440 points (Base 1960-100) (DA

from points 2836 to 4440 points has been merged in

Basic Pay).

4. Stagnation Increments: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, Stagnation

Increments shall be paid after every two years.

5. Special Increment: The Union demanded that

with effect from 01-04-2015, Certified Associate of

Indian Institute of Banking Increment be paid

beyond time scale i.e. Certified Associate of Indian

Institute of Banking Increments shall be continued

to be paid even after reaching end of pay scale.

6. Special/Functional Allowances: The Union

demanded that the following employees shall be

given Special/Functional Allowances as under:-

(a)

Cashier

: Rs. 1,000/- per month.

(b)

Clearing House Clerk : Rs. 500/- per month.

(c)

Cash in transit for Clerk : Rs. 100/- per trip.

(d)

Cash in transit for Sub : Rs. 50/- per trip.

Staff

(e)

Audit clerk

: Rs. 500/- per month.

(f)

Electricity Bill Cashier

: Rs. 200/- per month.

(g)

Recovery Clerk

: Rs. 200/- per month.

(h)

Stitching of Vouchers : Rs. 200/- per month.

HO for Sub Staff

(i)

Stitching of Vouchers : Rs. 100/- per month.

branch for Sub Staff

(j)

CTS Cheques for

: Rs 200/- per month.

Sub Staff

7. House Rent Allowance: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, 10% of Basic Pay

be paid as HRA to all members over and above the

existing HRA.

8. City Compensatory Allowance: The Union

demanded that with effect from 01-04-2015, 10% of

Basic Pay shall be paid as City Compensatory

Allowance to all the members over and above the

existing City Compensatory Allowance.

9. Medical Aid: The Union demanded that with effect

from 01-04-2015, medical aid of Rs. 10,000/- per

annum be paid to the members.

660

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

10. Daily Allowances: The Union demanded that

with effect from 01-04-2015, daily allowance of

Rs. 250/- per day be paid to the members for outdoor

duty within the State provided in case of official work

outside Goa, daily allowance of Rs. 500/- per day

plus actual hotel expenses on production of bills.

11. Leave Fare Concession: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, LFC shall be given

once every two years upto a limit of 6000 kms. by air

or any other mode of transport. Encashment be

permitted to those who wish to on the basis of a

simple declaration.

12. Closing Allowance: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, closing allowance

of Rs. 500/- per closing shall be paid.

13. Golden Jubilee Additional Increment: The

Union demanded that with effect from

01-04-2015, as the bank has completed 50 years of

existence, all employees shall be granted one

Golden Jubilee Additional Increment which should

be extended beyond pay scale.

14. Leave Accumulation: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, leave accumulation

be allowed upto 450 days and encashment of leave

be allowed upto 360 days. Leave in excess of 360

days should be availed before retirement. If not

granted due to exigencies, the same should be

encashed.

15. Casual Leave: The Union demanded that with

effect from 01-04-2015, casual leave not availed

during the year should be credited to unavailed

Casual Leave which employees can avail in the

subsequent years.

16. Encashment of Leave: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, encashment of

leave be allowed once every two years upto leave

of one month. In case of leave beyond accumulation,

the same should be automatically encashed.

17. Maternity/Paternity Leave: The Union

demanded that with effect from 01-04-2015,

maternity leave be increased to six months and

paternity leave be increased to 15 days on two

occasions during service period.

18. Special Union Leave: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, special union leave

be increased to 20 days for union officer bearers

and 15 days for executive committee members and

25 days of central committee members of All India

Co-operation Bank Employees Federation.

18. Mediclaim Facilities: The Union demanded

that with effect from 01-04-2015, mediclaim facilities

be introduced for the members and their family for

an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/-, premium of which shall

be paid by the bank.

2. Upon receipt of the reference, it was registered

as IT/03/2019 and registered AD notices were issued

to both the Parties. Pursuant to service of notices,

the Party I/Workmen filed Application for

appointment of Liquidator. Which Application

came to be allowed vide Order dated 27-04-2022 on

Exh. 4 and accordingly Mapusa Urban Co-operative

Bank of Goa Ltd., Head office, Mapusa, Goa was

appointed as a Liquidator to the present dispute.

3. The Party I thereafter filed the Statement of

Claim at Exh. 6. In brief it is the case of Workmen/

/Party I that Party I is the Trade Union of all the

Officers employed with Party II and it represents all

the Officers of Party II who are Workmen under the

ID Act. Party I has signed several Wage Statement

with Party II for improvement in which the wage

and service conditions of its member. The last such

wage Settlement revising the wages and the service

conditions between the Parties is for the period

with effect from 01-04-2012 to 31-03-2015. That after

the expiry of the said Wage Settlement of

31-03-2015 the Party I submitted the Charter of

Demand on behalf of its member dated 11-04-2015

seeking improvement of wages and service

conditions with effect from 01-04-2015 the detailed

Charter of Demand has been reproduced herein

above.

4. The present reference is on account of failure

on the part of Party II to settle the charter of

demands and for not revising the wages and service

condition of its member. It is further stated the

demands raised by Party I are justified as same are

paid in all other co-operative banks in Goa. It is

further submitted that some employees and officer

have been retrenched from the service but the legal

dues are not paid in terms of Section 25 (f) of the ID

Act in the facts and circumstances it is claimed

that the demands raised in the Charter of Demand

be granted by deciding the reference in favor of

Workmen/Party I.

5. The Party II filed their Written Statement at

Exh. 7. Party II objected the reference by raising the

preliminary objections stating:

(a) The demands which have been referred for

adjudication by Government of Goa are

wholly unrealistic, unreasonable and unjust.

There is absolute no merits or substance in

the demands raised by the Union on the

Bank and therefore the same deserves no

consideration and as such are liable to be

rejected out right.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

661

(b)

The State Govt. before making the reference

did not consider the relevant consideration

which could cloth it with the power to make

the reference under Section 10 of the Act.

The whole reference of all the disputes in

the Charter of Demands for adjudication was bad.

5. On merits it is the case of Party II that the

Bank is Multistate Co-op. Bank and states that it is

a society registered under the office of Central

Registrar of Co-op. Societies, New Delhi governed

under Multistate Co-op. Societies Act, 2002. The

Party I, employees were informed by the Party II

about the order No. DCBRCO.AD/2647/12.22.156/

/2019-20 dated 16-04-2020. The RBI cancelled the

license of bank to carry out the banking business

in India under Section 22 read with Section 56 of

Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The Party I was also

informed that in terms of said order the bank was

prevented from carrying on banking business under

Section 5(b) of the act and hence banking business

activities were stopped.

7. Further, immediately the Deposit, Insurance

and Credit Guarantee Corporation of India, a wing

of RBI took control of the functioning and ensured

that the functioning is done strictly in compliance

with their orders. The license cancellation order

did not mention any preferential payment to the

employees and hence the liquidation is bound by

instructions of DICGC-RBI. It is therefore, submitted

that Liquidator appointed has no preference to pay

any amount other than specified by DICGC.

8. The Party I has submitted that the wage revision

demand dates back to 01-04-2012 to 31-03-2015. In

this regards we place on record RBI Order dated

16-04-2020 wherein the final position is analyzed. In

view of assessed net worth, Gross NPA there is no

scope for any improvement of finance. The Party II

submits that the bank is not under revival and is

under liquidation and as such there is no scope for

any wage revision.

9. The Party II submits that all legal dues

including accommodation, sick leave have been

paid to each and every employee on pay roll on the

day the license was cancelled.

10. With reference to the Claim Statement Party II

admitted Para 1, 2, 3 and submitted that due to

circumstances beyond their control and also for

the reasons that Party II incurred loss for past years

since 2015-16 to 2021-22, they could not settle the

Charter of Demand. It is further stated that the

request for the Retrenchment Compensation made

by Party I before the Labour Commissioner was

dismissed by reasoned Order hence the present

reference cannot be considered favorably and same

be dismissed.

11. Considering the Claim Statement of Party I

and the Written Statement filed by the Party II

following issues were framed on 12-01-2024.

ISSUES

1. Whether the Party I proves that the Charter of

Demands raised by them against the Party II are

legal and justified?

2. Whether the Party II proves that the reference

made by the Government is not maintainable

as contended by the Party II in Para 1 (a) and (b)

of its written statement?

3. What relief? What Award?

13. As the matter was fixed for the evidence of

Party I at which time Party I/Workmen filed

Application at Exh. 10 for violation of provisions of

Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act and for

rendering the present reference infructuous. In this

Application Party I stated that during the pendency

of present reference, Party No. II has terminated by

way of retrenchment all employees as per

provisions of Section 25 F read with Section 25 FFF

of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, on the plea that

their establishment is being closed.

14. However, at the time of termination no one

month’s notice pay and retrenchment compensation

as per provisions of Section 25 F read with Section

25 FFF of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was paid.

15. In view of that it is submitted by Party I

humbly prays that order be passed holding Party

No. II violated the provisions of Section 33 of

Industrial Dispute Act by retrenching the services

of all employees while reference was pending before

this Hon’ble Tribunal thus rendering the present

reference infructuous.

16. In the reply filed by Party II opposing the

Application at Exh. 10 of Party I it is stated that at

the outset the Party II states and submits that the

present reference is on Charter of Demands of the

Union made in the year 2015. That the action of the

Party II in closing down the Bank and terminating

the services of all the workmen is not for

misconduct to attract provisions of Section 33 of

the said Act.

17. The Party II submits that the Reserve Bank of

India, Mumbai (RBI) vide its order No. DCBRCO.AD/

/2647/12.22156/2019-20 dated 16-04-2020 had cancelled/

/revoked the banking license granted to the Party II

for conducting the activity of Banking under Section

22 read with Section 56 of the Banking Regulation

662

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

Act, 1949, therefore Deposit Insurance Credit

Guarantee Corporation of India (DICGCI), a wing of

RBI took control of the functioning of the Party II

Bank and ensured that the functioning is done

statutory in compliance with the said order of the

RBI. A liquidator was appointed by the Central

Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi, to

monitor the liquidation process. The said liquidator

had no powers to pay any amount other than that

specified by the DICGCI.

18. The Party II states that in view of the order of

the RBI, the liquidator took steps to close the

branches at different places in Goa in phased

manner. On account of the closure of the branches,

the Party II had to discharge such employees in the

branches in phased manner. The Party II submits

that under the restrictions imposed by the RBI and

DICGCI, the Party II was allowed to pay the Gratuity,

Privilege leave encashment of the Employees and

salary till the date of closure.

19. The Party II submits that since the License of

the Party II to conduct the activity of the Banking

was cancelled by the RBI, the Party II had no

alternative then to discharge the workmen from

time to time in phased manner limited powers of

the liquidator. The Party II submits that the

provisions of Section 25F for payment of

Retrenchment Compensation is not a condition

precedent to close the branches of the Party II and

non-payment of the same would not render the

action of closure illegal as the closure has been

admitted by the Party I.

20. The Party II submits that if the Party I feels

that the Party II has contravened Section 33 of the

said Act during the pendency of the present

reference, the remedy to the Party I is to raise a

separate dispute and get the same adjudicated and

accordingly pray that Application at Exh. 10 be

dismissed.

21. Heard Arguments advanced by Shri Subhash

Naik Jorge and heard Argument advanced by Adv.

S.B.S. Bangui.

22. Sub-clause (b), Clause 1 of Section 33 of the

Industrial Dispute Act prohibits an Employer from

discharging or punishing any workmen concerned

in such dispute for any misconduct connected with

the said dispute by dismissal or otherwise, save

with express permission in writing of the authority

before which the procedure is pending. further

Clause 2 of Section 33 provides during the pendency

of any such proceeding in respect to industrial

dispute the employer in accordance with the

standing order applicable to the workmen in

concern dispute (or where are no standing order in

accordance with the terms of the contract whether

express or implied between him and the workmen

may (a) alter in regards to any matter not connected

with the dispute the condition of service applicable

that workmen immediately before the commencement

of such proceedings or (b) for any misconduct not

connected with the dispute, discharge or punish,

whether by dismissal or otherwise that workmen.

23. It is the contention of Party II that if the Party I

is aggrieved of Party II having violated the

provisions of Section 33 of the ID Act than the

remedy to the Party I is to raise a separate dispute.

Therefore the contention of Party I that by way of

retrenchment the Party II had terminated Employees

as per the provisions of Section 25 (f) read with

Section 25 FFF does not hold good. It is the matter

of record and which fact has been admitted by the

Party I that the establishment of Party II had to be

closed down on account of Order of the RBI. This

Tribunal have no reason to disbelieve the

contention of the Party II that on account of the

cancellation of the license of Party II to conduct the

activity of Banking by RBI, the Party II was left with

no other alternative but to discharge its Employees

from time to time in a phased manner which fact

has not been disputed by Party I.

Hence the following Order:

ORDER

(i)

The Application filed by the Party I/Workmen

at Exh. 10 stands dismissed consequently the

present reference stands dismissed being

infructuous.

(ii)

No order as to costs.

(iii)

Inform the Government accordingly.

Sd/-

(Vijayalaxmi Shivolkar),

Presiding Officer,

Industrial Tribunal-cum-

-Labour Court.

——————

Department of Museums

Directorate of Museums

––

Order

No. 1/352/2023/DM-720

The Government of Goa is pleased to constitute

Expert Committee under the Chairmanship of

Secretary for Museum for ‘Restoration and setting

up Museum’ at Old Secretariat Building, Panaji.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 31

1ST NOVEMBER, 2024

663

The Expert Committee hereby constituted shall

consist of following members:

1. Secretary (Museum)

— Chairman.

2. Principal Chief Engineer or

— Member.

his representative, Public

Works Department

3. Marwin C. Gomes, Chief

— Member.

Architect, Public Works

Department

4. Ar. Ketak Nachinolkar,

— Member.

Conservation Architect

5. Natasha Da Costa Fernandes, — Member.

Curator Museum of

Christian Art

6. Baiju Parthan, well Known

— Member.

Artist

7. Rohit Falgaonkar, Expert of

— Member.

Goan History & Archeology

8. Karmal (Prita) Sardesai,

— Member.

well known Architect

9. Querozito De’souza,

— Member.

well known Painter

10. Anjali Sen, Former Director

— Member.

of National Gallery of

Modern Art

11. Viraj Naik, well known Painter

— Member.

12. Prashant Panjiar, Photographer, — Member.

well known Photo Journalist

and Curator

13.

Tallulah D’silva, well known

— Member.

Architect

14.

Director of Museums

— Member

Secretary.

Scope of work of Expert Committee is as follows:

1) To approve the restoration plan and its

financial estimate.

2) To finalize/approve the layout and interior

design plan for setting of museum and art

galleries.

3) To monitor the execution of work.

4) To advice and setting of various galleries.

The committee shall meet as and when required

to discuss the matter related to ‘Restoration and

setting up museum at Old Secretariat building’.

The same has been approved by the Government

vide U. O. No. 233/F dated 27-09-2024.

The above committee shall come in force

immediately till the restoration and setting of the

museum at Old Secretariat.

Dr. Vasu M. Usapkar, Director (Museums)

Panaji, 16th October, 2024.

——————

Department of Public Health

––

Order

No. 4/16/2002-II/PHD/Vol. II/3172

On the recommendation of the Goa Public Service

Commission as conveyed vide their letter No. COM/

/II/11/30(11)/2021/198 dated 20-9-2024, Government

is pleased to promote the following Doctors to the

post of Associate Professor in the Department of

Obstetrics and Gynaecology (Group “A” Gazetted)

in Goa Medical College and Hospital, Bambolim on

regular basis in the Level 11 of Pay Matrix (PB-3:

Rs. 15,600-39,100/- + GP: Rs. 6,600/-) and other

allowances to be fixed as per rules with immediate

effect:-

1. Dr. Rupa Satish Padwalkar.

2. Dr. Sarika Damodar alias Swapnil Arsekar.

The promotion is made against the vacancy

occurred due to (i) acceptance of voluntary

retirement of Dr. Manjusha Jindal w.e.f. 16-11-2021

(f.n.) vide Order dated 30-09-2021 and; (ii) acceptance

of voluntary retirement of Dr. Mrinalini

Sahasrabhojanee w.e.f. 31-07-2023 vide order dated

12-07-2023.

By order and in the name of the Governor of

Goa.

Gautami S. Parmekar, Under Secretary (Health-I).

Porvorim, 23rd October, 2024.

——————

Department of Transport

Directorate of Transport

––

Notification

No. D.Tpt/EST/3041/2022/2575

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-

-section (2) of Section 11 of the Goa Motor Vehicles

Tax Act, 1974 (Act 8 of 1974) and for the purpose of