GOVERNMENT OF GOA

Department of Education

Directorate of Technical Education, Polytechnic Section

Order

Read: Memorandum No. 17/3/99/2026/DTE/3444 dated 29-01-2026.

On the recommendations of the Goa Public Service Commission conveyed vide their letter No.

COM/I/5/18(4)/2024/405 dated 13-01-2026, Government is pleased to appoint Ms. Rita Perpetua J. Vaz, on

temporary basis to the post of Lecturer in Architectural Assistantship (Group ‘A’ Gazetted) at Government

Polytechnic Panaji, Goa on an initial pay in the pay matrix level 9A w.e.f. the date of joining as per the

terms & conditions contained in the Memorandum cited above.

The appointment is against the vacant post of Lecturer in Architectural Assistantship at Government

Polytechnic, Panaji.

Ms. Rita Perpetua J. Vaz will be on probation for a period of two years.

She should join duties within 30 days of the receipt of this order, failing which this order is liable to be

cancelled without further notice.

She has been declared fit by Medical Board, Goa Medical College & Hospital, Bambolim vide letter

No. 4/105/85-H/GMC/2026/116 dated 24-02-2026.

Her character and antecedents have been verified and nothing adverse is reported against her as

conveyed by the Deputy Collector & DRO, South Goa District, Office of the Collector & District

Magistrate, South Goa District, Magisterial Section, Matanhy Saldanha Administrative Complex, Margao-

Goa vide letter No. 36/01/2006/SG/MISC/VCA/MAG/M.O.772 dated 12-03-2026.

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

Bhushan. K. Savoikar, Director of Technical Education and ex officio Additional Secretary.

Porvorim.

No. 17/3/99/2026/DTE/107

Date : 09-Apr-2026

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

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

RNI No. GOAENG/2002/6410

Panaji, 16th April, 2026 (Chaitra 26, 1948)

SERIES II No. 3

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

Department of Forest

Office of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

Order

In pursuance of the provisions contained in Clause (b) of Rule 3 of the Wildlife Disposal of Wild

Animal Article Rules, 2023, I, Shri K. Ramesh Kumar, IFS, Chief Wildlife Warden, Goa hereby constitute

the committee consisting of the following members, namely:-

Deputy Conservator of Forests (Concerned Division in-charge)

—

Chairman

ii)

A representative of the local Gram Panchayat

—

Member

iii)

Mamlatdar of concerned Taluka

—

Member

iv)

Wildlife Expert (as decided by the Committee)

—

Member

Range Forest Officer (Concerned Range)

—

Member Secretary

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

K. Ramesh Kumar, IFS, Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Chief Wildlife Warden,

Goa.

Panaji.

____________

Order

The Governor of Goa is pleased to promote the following Range Forest Officer (RFO), to the post of

Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) (Group “A” Gazetted), in the Office of the Principal Chief

Conservator of Forests, Forest Department, Panaji, on regular basis in the Level 10 of the Pay Matrix as

per C.C.S. (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016, with immediate effect:-

1) Shri Vilas P. Gawas.

2) Shri Shamsundar L. Gauns alias Shri Shamsunder Laxman Gawas.

3) Shri Siddesh Upaso Gaude (ST).

4) Shri Rudyard D’Silva.

The above officers shall be on probation for a period of 02 years from the date of joining the post. The

officers shall exercise the option for fixation of pay within one month from the date of this Order in terms

of F. R. 22(I)(a)(1).

This issues in consultation with the Goa Public Service Commission as conveyed vide its letter No.

COM/II/11/22(1)/2022/512 dated 13-03-2026.

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

Sitaram Gurudas Sawal, Under Secretary (Forest).

Porvorim.

_____________

Memorandum

Read: (1) Order No. 4/2/2024-FOR/202 dated 04-09-2024.

(2) Order No. 4/2/2002-FOR(Part)230 dated 24-08-2023.

No. CWLW-56/WL-WLCCB-FD-2025-26/5172

Date : 06-Mar-2026

No. 4/1/2024-FOR/170

Date : 25-Mar-2026

No. 4/4/2012/Seniority-FOR/Part/28

Date : 27-Jan-2025

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

(3) Memorandum No. 4-4-2012/Seniority-FOR dated 13-04-2023.

(4) Memorandum No. 4/4/2012/Seniority-FOR/Part/01 dated 02-01-2025.

Whereas, the Seniority of Assistant Conservator of Forest in the Forest Department was last finalized

vide Memorandum read in the preamble at Sr. No. (3).

And whereas, from 2023 to till date, a total number of 02 officers have been appointed to the Assistant

Conservator of Forest Department by direct recruitment and promotion vide orders read in the preamble at

Sr. No. (1) to (2).

And whereas, a Tentative Seniority of Assistant Conservator of Forests in the Forest Department was

circulated and objections, if any, were invited vide Memorandum No. 4/4/2012/Seniority-FOR/Part/01

dated 02-01-2025, read at Sr. No. (4) above.

And whereas, no representations/objections have been received from the officials of the Goa Forest

Department.

Now therefore, the final seniority list of Assistant Conservator of Forests is hereby finalized as under:-

Sr.

No.

Name of the officials

Promote/

direct

Date of birth

Date of appointment

Remarks

Shri Amar A. Heblekar

18-08-1968

28-03-2016

Shri Deepak Pednekar

06-04-1970

01-04-2016

Shri Damodar Prakash Salelkar

01-10-1982

21-11-2017

Kum. Cliffa D’Costa

18-04-1967

06-06-2019

Shri Vishwas K. Chodankar

04-09-1968

06-06-2019

Shri Jose Colaco (ST)

05-10-1966

06-06-2019

Shri Paresh C. Porab

15-04-1974

09-09-2020

Shri Dyaneshwar M. Kudalkar (SC)

08-03-1967

15-12-2020

Shri Minguel A. Fernandes

16-05-1973

15-12-2020

10.

Shri Vishwanath Pingulkar

03-05-1968

24-08-2023

11.

Shri Harsh Damodar Phadte

26-07-1999

04-09-2024

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

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

Porvorim.

——— ♦♦♦———

Department of Home

Home-General Division

Order

Pursuant to the Order dated 26-02-2026 passed in Miscellaneous Application No. 729/2025 in Crl.

Appeal No. 1927/2025 tilted as ‘Pinki Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India, Government of Goa is pleased to constitute a Review Committee comprising of following:

Principal Secretary (Home)

—

Chairman

Director General of Police

—

Member

Secretary (Women and Child Development)

—

Member

No. 2/2/2024-HD(G)/1002

Date : 08-Apr-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

Secretary (Social Welfare)

—

Member

District Magistrate (North)

—

Member

District Magistrate (South)

—

Member

District Magistrate (Kushavati)

—

Member

Superintendent of Police (North)

—

Member

Superintendent of Police (South)

—

Member

10.

Superintendent of Police (Kushavati)

—

Member

11.

Director, Women and Child Development

—

Member

12.

Director, Social Welfare

—

Member

13.

Secretary, Goa State Commission for Protection of Child Rights

—

Member

14.

Superintendent of Police (AHTU)

—

Member Secretary

The above Committee is entrusted with the task of periodical review of the vulnerable areas, more

particular, those areas which are prone to child trafficking and monitor the progress of action.

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

Manthan Manoj Naik, Under Secretary (Home-I).

Porvorim.

——— ♦♦♦———

Department of Labour

Order

Whereas, the Government of Goa is of the opinion that an industrial dispute exists between the

management of M/s. Cipla Limited, Verna Industrial Estate, Verna, Salcete-Goa and it’s workmen

represented by Bhartiya Kamgar Sena Union in respect of the matter specified in the Schedule hereto;

And whereas, the Government of Goa considers it expedient to refer the said dispute for adjudication.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of

the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947), the Government of Goa hereby refers the said

dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal of Goa at Panaji-Goa, constituted under Section 7A of

the said Act.

SCHEDULE

(1)

Whether the Bhartiya Kamgar Sena Union has locus standi to raise Industrial Dispute in respect of

alleged illegal deduction/non-payment of wages and non-payment of overtime, on behalf of the 11

workmen, as shown in “Annexure A”, before the management of M/s Cipla Limited, Verna Industrial

Estate, Verna, Salcete-Goa?

(2)

If answer to issue No. (1) above is in affirmative, then whether the 11 workmen, as shown in

“Annexure A”, could be construed as Workman as defined under Section 2 (s) of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947?

(3)

If the answer to the above issue No. (2) above is in affirmative, then, whether the deduction/non-

payment of wages and non-payment of overtime of the 11 workmen, as shown in “Annexure A”, is

legal and justified?

(4)

If yes, to what relief the 11 workmen are entitled to?

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

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

Porvorim.

No. 28/07/2026/LAB/193

Date : 08-Apr-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

“ANNEXURE A”

Sr. No.

Name of the Workmen

Designation

Shri Anil Kumbar

Executive (Junior Operator)

Shri Yashwant Bhise

Executive (Junior Operator)

Shri Kiran Dhepi

Executive (Junior Operator)

Shri Shriram Mane

Executive (Junior Operator)

Shri Amol Navle

Executive (Junior Operator)

Shri Suyog Palav

Executive (Senior Operator)

Shri Akshay Pawar

Executive (Senior Operator)

Shri Dinesh Kothavale

Executive (Senior Operator)

Shri Karedeen Choudhary

Executive (Senior Operator)

10.

Shri Santosh Rane

Executive (Senior Operator)

11.

Shri Dattaram Ansurkar

Executive (Senior Operator)

_______________

Notification

The following Award passed by the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, at Panaji-Goa on 25-03-

2026 in Ref. No. IT/06/2007 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.

_____________

IN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND LABOUR COURT

GOVERNMENT OF GOA AT PANAJI

(Before Mrs. Vijayalaxmi Shivolkar, Hon’ble Presiding Officer)

Ref. No.: IT/06/2007

Workmen,

Rep. by the Goa MRF Employees Union,

Saidham, Dhavalimol,

Ponda-Goa.

…..

Workmen/Party I

V/s

M/s M. R. F. Limited,

Tisk, Usgao,

Ponda-Goa.

…..

Employer/Party II

Workman/Party I represented by Learned Advocate Shri P. Agrawal.

Employer/Party II represented by Learned Advocate Shri G. K. Sardessai.

AWARD

(Delivered on this the 25^th day of the month of March of the year, 2026)

No. 28/02/2026-LAB/Part-IV/196

Date : 08-Apr-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

By Order dated 24^th February, 2006 bearing No. 28/44/P/2004-LAB-Part/114, the Government of Goa

in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947 (Central Act 14 of 1947), has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

SCHEDULE

(1)

“Whether the action of M/s MRF Limited, Usgao, Ponda-Goa, in deducting wages and imposing

fines on those workmen who were absent from work on polling days i.e. on 05/09/1999 and 30-05-

2002, is legal and justified?

(2)

If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to?”

2. Upon receipt of the reference, it was registered as IT/06/2007 and registered A/D notices were

issued to both the Parties. Pursuant to service of notice, Party I filed their Claim Statement at Exhibit 5.

3. The Party I stated that the Party II/M/s MRF Limited is a limited Company incorporated under the

Companies Act, 1956 having its registered Office at 124, Greams Road, Madras. The present dispute is in

respect of the said workmen who are employees of their Company/Factory in Ponda, Goa where the

Company employs approximately 970 workmen.

4. The Party I stated that the Company is engaged in the manufacture of Tyres and is one of the most

reputed concerns in the manufacture of tyres and is well established in its line of business. The Company

has several factories all over India and employs a large workforce and due to the increase in its business

activities and profits from year to year, it is financially very sound.

5. The Party I stated that since the formation of the Union, the Company has been attempting to

disrupt the unity of the workmen employed by the Company who are members of the Union. Of late, there

has been large scale harassment and victimization of the Union Office bearers and its other members due to

their legitimate trade union activities. The harassment, inter-alia, include illegal changes in service

conditions, unjustified and unwarranted suspensions, charge-sheets based on false and fabricated charges,

refusal to negotiate in good faith, and impositions of unfair labour practices in the guise of following

management policy, etc., and further including the present illegal termination of the 0members of the

Union.

6. The Party I stated that by Notification dated 30/08/1999, the Government of Goa was pleased to

notify under the provisions of Section 135-B of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 that 05-09-1999

as “Polling Day” for general elections to the Lok Sabha in the State of Goa as a “Paid Holiday” for all the

industrial workers in the State of Goa.

7. The Party I states that the Party II/Management issued an illegal notice dated 03/09/1999 contrary

to the provisions of Section 135-B and the said Notification under the Representation of the People Act

declaring 05/09/1999 a holiday, by declaring only Shift I (8.00 hrs. to 16.00 hrs.) as a holiday and Shift II

(16.00 hrs to 19.00 hrs.) being a holiday and that the workmen were required to report for work between

00.00 hrs and 8.00 hrs (III Shift) of 04/09/1999 and 19.00 hrs. to 24.00 hrs. (part of II Shift of 05/09/1999).

The Party I states that since the workmen were conferred with a paid holiday on the said polling day by

virtue of Section 135-B of the said Act, they accordingly did not report for work on all 3 Shifts between

00.00 hrs. and 24.00 hrs. of 05/09/1999, irrespective of the Shift that the Party II/Management had

assigned them to work in.

8. The Party I/Workmen further states that a Clarification issued by the Election Commission of India

by Circular dated 06/04/1999 was quashed by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay vide Order dated

23/02/2004 in Writ Petition No. 283/99 to the extent of Para-4 of the said Circular which clarified that the

paid holiday may be declared only for the Shift during which a poll is to be taken, making it clear that the

notice dated 03/09/1999 issued by the Party II/Management is illegal and contrary to law.

9. The Party I stated that the Party II/Management issued show-cause notice dated 23/09/1999 to the

workmen alleging therein that more than 221 workmen acting in concert at remaining absent authorised on

the Polling Day and had gone on strike without notice and consequently an illegal fine equivalent to eight

(8) days’ wages was proposed as punishment in the said show cause notice. The Party I stated that this

action of the Party II/Management in illegally imposing a fine as a punishment is contrary to law and

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

accordingly demanded that they be restored and paid the wages illegally deducted by the Party

II/Management as a fine.

10. The Party I stated that a similar situation arose on 21/05/2002 when the Government of Goa

issued a Notification under the same provision declaring 30/05/2002 as a public holiday and a paid holiday

for all the industrial workers in the State of Goa. The Party II/Management issued an illegal notice dated

20/05/2002 contrary to the provisions of Section 135-B and the Notification issued thereunder by requiring

the workmen to work in Third Shift of 29/05/2002 from 00.00 hrs. to 08.00 hrs. and in Second Shift of

30/05/2002 from 19.00 hrs., to 24.00 hrs. when the said entire day should have been declared a holiday and

all the workmen be allowed to stay away from work.

11. The Party I states that while imposing the illegal penalty of fine, the Company has failed to

conduct any enquiry on the show-cause notice issued to the workmen and has neither given the workmen

an opportunity to defend themselves at any enquiry nor were the principles of natural justice followed

before imposing the illegal punishment.

12. The Party I further states that thereafter the Party II/Management illegally and contrary to law,

paid the workmen who had reported for duties according to the notice, only for the period that they worked

on that day instead of actually paying the workmen their entire wages as on 30/05/2002 which had been

declared as a paid holiday. The deductions of wages from the workmen who did not report for work on that

day is illegal and contrary to law as the workmen would be entitled to full wages on the said paid holiday

so also consequential benefits that would accrue to the workmen during a paid holiday were required to be

given to the workmen.

13. The Party I/Union raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Commissioner, Panaji vide their

letter dated 05/05/2004 enclosing the Demand Letter dated 16/04/2004 along with the Justification

Statement for the claims.

14. The Party II in their Written Statement filed at Exhibit 6 denied that they are attempting to disrupt

the unity of the workmen employed by them and also denied that there has been large-scale harassment or

victimisation of the union office bearers or its other embers for their alleged union activities. Party II

denied that there are changes in service conditions and that there are unjustified or unwarranted

suspensions as alleged. It is denied that there is imposition of unfair labour practices or that it has refused

to negotiate in good faith with the workmen as alleged. It is denied that any termination of any member of

the Union has been effected in so far as the present matter is concerned.

15. The Party II submits that the Government of Goa had declared 05/09/1999 as a paid holiday for

the industrial establishments u/s 135-B of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and that by notice

dated 01/09/1999, the Office of the Commissioner, Labour and Employment circulated the

clarifications/circular dated 06/04/1999 issued from the Election Commissioner’s Office to all the

industries and the Party II also received the said Circular.

16. The Party II submits that the Circular of the Election Commissioner in respect of the paid holiday

was circulated through the Office of the Labour Commissioner to all the industries including the Party II

Company and based on the said Circular of the Election Commissioner, paid holiday was declared by the

Party II for all its workmen in terms of the said Circular and accordingly notice dated 03/09/1999 was

displayed. The Party II submits that a section of the workmen represented by the Goa MRF Employees

Union filed a Writ Petition challenging the notice displayed by the Party II and that the Hon’ble High Court

of Bombay at Goa Bench after hearing the Parties was pleased to uphold the validity of the notice dated

03/09/1999 and as a measure gave further concession in terms of time to enable the employees working in

the preceding shift of 05/09/1999 to vote at the election by its Order dated 04/09/1999.

17. The Party II submits that the Company accordingly by notice dated 04/09/1999 intimated its

employees that the paid holiday would be between 4.00 a.m. till 7.00 p.m. of 05/09/1999 as directed in the

Order of the High Court and made necessary additional transport arrangements for the concerned

employees incurring additional expenses/cost thereof. The Party II submits that despite the directions of the

Hon’ble High Court and the relevant notice displayed by the Party II, a large section of the workmen at the

behest of the Union did not attend work on 05/09/1999 which resulted in heavy financial loss to the tune of

over 20 Lakhs to the Party II.

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

18. The Party II submits that some of the workmen who absented from work deliberately and in clear

defiance of the High Court Order were asked to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be

taken against them as the same amounted to a serious act of misconduct in accordance with the Certified

Standing Orders of the Company and the workmen who were found guilty of the misconduct as above

were punished by way of fines imposed on them as provided for in the Certified Standing Orders of the

Company.

19. The Party II submits that from the above, it is apparent that the Company merely relied on the

representation/clarification of the Election Commissioner and declared paid holiday for the polling hours

of 05/09/1999 and beyond thereby allowing every employee to vote at the Election. The Company merely

based its grant of paid holiday to its employees on the Circular of the Election Commissioner which had

been communicated through the Office of the Commissioner of Labour and therefore it cannot be said that

the Company acted or even intended to act in derogation of the provisions of the Representation of

People’s Act, 1951.

20. The Party II submits that the fines and deduction of wages were made in view of the acts of

misconduct committed by the concerned workmen by absenting unauthorizedly from work without leave

or intimation on 04/09/1999 and 05/09/1999 and thereafter as the same amounted to serious acts of

misconduct in violation of the Certified Standing Orders of the Company and that the disciplinary action

initiated against its employees was taken in accordance to law and the same is justified.

21. The Party II submits that the Government of Goa by Notification in the Official Gazette declared

30/05/2002 as the paid holiday in the State of Goa in view of the State Assembly Elections. The Party II

relying on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court on 04/09/1999 declared 30/05/2002 as a paid holiday as

was done for 05/09/1999 as the law on declaration of holiday on a Polling Day was laid down in the Order

dated 04/09/1999 of the Hon’ble High Court. It is submitted that the holiday on 30/05/2002 had been

declared exactly as per the directions of the Hon’ble High Court given earlier and according to which the

entire day was not to have been declared a holiday as contended by Party I. It is denied that notice dated

20/05/2002 displayed by the Party II was contrary to the provisions of Section 135-B of the Representation

of People’s Act, 1951 or contrary to any other law in force.

22. The Party II submits that Paid Holiday wages were paid to all the workmen scheduled to work

from 4.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. of 30/05/2002 and obviously those workmen who did not attend work for the

period for which paid holiday was not declared were not paid wages as provided under the Payment of

Wages Act. It is submitted that there cannot be any illegality as regards to the payment of wages to the

workmen in the present matter. The Party II submits that the Union after nearly 5 years had raised a

demand by their letter dated 16/04/2004 and that meanwhile by Order dated 23/02/2004, the Hon’ble High

Court was pleased to hold that a day is 24 hours.

23. The Party II submits that the imposing of fines and deduction of wages has been effected as

provided for in the Certified Standing Orders of the Company as the section of workmen had

unauthorisedly absented from work without leave or intimation on 04/09/1999 and 5/09/1999 in defiance

of notice dated 04/09/1999 and the Order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 04/09/1999. The Party II has

denied that the deduction of wages an imposition of fines on the workmen has been resorted to by the

Company to victimize the workmen as alleged and that such deductions caused any discrimination among

the different workmen as alleged. It is denied that that the Party I/Union has made out a prima facie case in

support of its demand.

24. In the Rejoinder filed by the Party I/Union at Exhibit 7, the Party I denied the defence taken by

Party II in their Written Statement and maintained and reiterated the facts stated in their Claim Statement.

25. Considering the Claim Statement of Party I, the Written Statement filed by the Party II and the

Rejoinder filed by Party I, following issues were framed at Exhibit 8 on 04.10.2007.

ISSUES

Whether the Goa M.R.F Employees Union has locus standi to raise present dispute?

(*Corrected Issue): Whether the Party II proves that the Goa M.R.F. Employees Union has no locus

standi to raise present dispute?

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

Whether dispute under the reference is an Industrial Dispute within the meaning of Sec. 2(K) of the

I. D. Act, 1947?

(*Corrected Issue): Whether the Party II proves that the dispute under the reference is an industrial

dispute within the meaning of Sec. 2(K) of the I. D. Act, 1947?

Do the Workmen/(Party I) prove that the entire day falling on 5-9-1999 was paid holiday for them?

Do the Workmen/(Party I) prove that the entire day falling on 30-5-2002 was paid holiday for them?

Do the Workmen/(Party I) prove that the notices dated 3-9-1999 and 30-5-2002 issued by Party II are

illegal and contrary to law?

Do the Workmen/(Party I) prove that fine imposed upon them by Party II for absence from duty on

5-9-99 is illegal and without procedure?

Do the Workmen/(Party I) prove that deduction of wages by the Party II from those who did not

report to duty on 30-5-2002 is illegal and contrary to law?

Whether Workmen/(Party I) are entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?

What Award?

26. I have gone through the records i.e. the pleadings, the oral as well as documentary evidence

adduced by both the Parties, the written synopsis filed as well as the oral arguments advanced by both the

Parties and after considering the same my findings on the issues with reasons are as follows:

Issue No. 1 & 2

In the Negative

Issue No. 3 to 7

In the Affirmative

Issue No. 8

In the Affirmative

Issue No. 9

As per Final Order

REASONS

27. Issue No. 1 & 2: The Learned Predecessor, Presiding Officer of this Tribunal was pleased to frame

altogether 9 issues, however, in respect of Issue No.1 and 2, it is not stated as to on whom the burden to

prove both these issues lies on. On perusal of the Written Statement it is seen that it is the Party

II/Management who has taken the plea of Union’s no locus standi to raise the present dispute and that the

subject matter cannot be an industrial dispute. Being so, the burden to prove both these issues though

specifically not mentioned in both these issues is on the Management, hence necessary correction of both

these issues is carried out accordingly and both these issues are taken together for discussion.

28. It is in the evidence of the Management witness Shri Govind Mapari that the demands raised by

the Union were not responded by the Management because it is their contention that the disputant union

had no authority to do so. The Party II in its letter dated 12/06/2004 had invited the attention of the Asst.

Labour Commissioner that the disputant union had no locus standi to raise any demand on behalf of their

workmen and that the Authority of the signatory of the Justification Statement dated 06/05/2004 was also

challenged. The Party II/Company had justified in the same letter that the fines imposed as well as

deduction of wages on the polling days were done within the framework of law and the conditions of

employment applicable to the workmen.

29. Apart from the averments made in the Affidavit in Evidence of the Management witness, Mr.

Mapari, the Management did not bring any other relevant material including any document on record to

show that the said Rohidas Naik is not the President of the Union or that he did not have any locus standi to

represent the workmen as well as the Union in the present reference.

30. On the other hand, the Party I/Workmen produced on record the letter dated 14/10/2013 at Exh.

113 addressed by the Company to the ALC wherein the ALC had been informed about the pending dispute

in IT/33/1997 by the Company in which the issue of Presidentship of Rohidas is involved. The Party

I/Workman also produced on record two Award at Exh.114 and 115 passed in IT/33/1997 and C-

IT/04/1998 respectively. When put to the witness of the Management, Mr. Mapari in his cross-examination

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

that the issue pertaining to Rohidas Naik being the President of the Union has been decided in the said

Award, Mr. Mapari stated that he cannot say anything on the said suggestion.

31. Similarly, Mr. Mapari in the cross-examination stated that he cannot say anything to the

suggestion that in terms of Exh.115 i.e. the Award passed in C-IT/04/1998, the locus standi of Rohidas

Naik as the President of the Union has already been decided. Thus, there is no clear denial of the fact of the

issue of Presidentship of Rohidas Naik being decided in both the above Awards from the Management side

nor the Management could bring any material on record to prove that Shri Rohidas Naik was not the

President of the Union and that he could not have represented the Union and that he lacks locus standi to

represent the workmen as well as the Union. As such, for want of sufficient evidence, both the Issues taken

for discussion together stands answered in the negative.

32. Issue No. 3 to 7: It is in the evidence of Shri Rohidas Naik that the Party II/Management had

issued an illegal notice dated 03/09/1999 contrary to the provisions of Section 135-B and the said

Notification under the Representation of the People Act declaring 05/09/1999 a holiday, by declaring only

Shift I (8.00 hrs. to 16.00 hrs.) as a holiday and that the workmen were required to report for work between

00.00 hrs and 8.00 hrs. (III Shift) of 04/09/1999 and 19.00 hrs. to 24.00 hrs. (part of II Shift of

05/09/1999.) The Party I states that since the workmen were conferred with a paid holiday on the said

polling day by virtue of Section 135-B of the said Act, they accordingly did not report for work on all 3

Shifts between 00.00 hrs. and 24.00 hrs. of 05/09/1999, irrespective of the Shift that the Party

II/Management had assigned them to work in.

33. It is further stated that the Clarification issued by the Election Commission of India by Circular

dated 06/04/1999 was quashed by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay vide Order dated 23/02/2004 in Writ

Petition No. 283/99 to the extent of Para-4 of the said Circular which clarified that the paid holiday may be

declared only for the Shift during which a poll is to be taken, making it clear that the notice dated

03/09/1999 issued by the Party II/Management is illegal and contrary to law. That the Party II/Management

issued show-cause notice dated 23/09/1999 to the workmen alleging therein that more than 221 workmen

acting in concert at remaining absent unauthorisedly on the Polling Day and had gone on strike without

notice and consequently illegal fine equivalent to eight (8) days’ wages was proposed as punishment in the

said show cause notice. Thus according to Party I the action of the Party II/Management in illegally

imposing a fine as a punishment is contrary to law. That a similar situation arose on 21/05/2002 when the

Government of Goa issued a Notification under the same provision declaring 30/05/2002 as a public

holiday and a paid holiday for all the industrial workers in the State of Goa. The Party II/Management

issued an illegal notice dated 20/05/2002 contrary to the provisions of Section 135-B and the Notice issued

therein required the workmen to work in Third Shift of 29/05/2002 from 00.00 hrs. to 08.00 hrs. and in

Second Shift of 30/05/2002 from 19.00 hrs., to 24.00 hrs. when the said entire day should have been

declared a holiday and all the workmen be allowed to stay away from work.

34. In support of their case as set out in the Claim Statement as well as in support of deposition by

their witness the Party I/Workman placed reliance on both the Circulars dated 01/09/1999 and 06/04/1999

at Exh. 84 and Exh. 85 respectively, also produced on record the Notice dated 03/09/1999 at Exh. 87, the

Order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 04/09/1999 at Exh. 88, the Show-cause Notice dated 23/09/1999 at

Exh. 90 and the Charge-sheet cum Notice dated 20/09/1999 at Exh. 91. The Party II witness Shri Mapari in

the cross-examination admitted that no enquiry was conducted into the said charge-sheet and that only

show-cause notice was issued in terms of Certified Standing Orders. When there is no enquiry, obviously,

there is no opportunity to defend their stand and therefore the contention of the Party I that they were not

given opportunity to defend themselves and consequently the principles of natural justice were not

followed before imposing the fine by way of punishment needs to be accepted and appreciated in view of

the admitted position that no enquiry was conducted into the charge-sheet that was issued to the Party

I/Workmen. On the other hand the Party II/Management could not justify that the action taken by them by

imposing a fine on the Polling dates i.e. on 05/09/1999 and 30/05/2002 was not in contravention of the

Notification issued by the Government of Goa on the Polling Day or that the action taken by them against

the workmen was based on the findings of the enquiry conducted pursuance to the show-cause notice

issued to the Workmen as the evidence on record reveals that no such enquiry was conducted either into the

show-cause notice or in respect of the charge-sheet issued to the workmen. In the circumstances above, it

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

cannot be held that the action of the Management in imposing fine for their absenteeism on the Polling Day

was legal and justified.

35. Mr. Mapari by way of his own statement in his Affidavit confirmed that the Hon’ble High Court

vide its Order dated 23/02/2004 was pleased to hold a day is 24 hours while disposing off the Writ Petition

filed by the Party I/Union. Being so, nothing more remains to be proved by the Party I/Union in rebuttal to

the contention of the Management that they had paid holiday wages to all workmen scheduled to work

from 4.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. on 30/05/2002 and wages were not paid to the section of workmen as they did

not report for work for the period for which paid holiday were not declared and were not paid wages.

Hence, all the issues taken together for discussions stand answered in favour of the Workmen in the

affirmative.

36. Issue No. 8: For the reasons stated in Issue No. 3 to 7 this issue stands answered in favour of the

workmen in the affirmative.

Hence the following Order.

ORDER

The Management is hereby directed to pay to the workmen their entire wages with consequential

benefits for the paid polling holiday of 05-09-1999 and shall pay to the workmen their entire wages

with consequential benefits for the paid polling holiday of 30-05-2002.

ii.

Further, the Management is hereby directed to pay to the workmen the fine equivalent to the illegal

fine imposed on them for their alleged absence of work on 05-09-1999 with interest on the same day

from 05-09-1999 till actual payment.

iii.

Inform the Government accordingly.

Vijayalaxmi R. Shivolkar, Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal & Labour Court.

Panaji.

——— ♦♦♦———

Department of Law

Law (Establishment) Division

Order

Read:- File No. 8/5/2026-LD(Estt.)/233 dated 15-01-2026.

In continuation to the above referred Order, the Government is pleased to appoint Shri. Vimod Dalal,

Chief Officer, Cuncolim Municipal Council, Cuncolim, Goa to look after day-to-day functioning of

Mathagramastha Hindu Sabha by assisting Shri. Bhushan K. Savoikar, Administrator, Mathagramastha

Hindu Sabha in performing his functions as an Administrator.

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

Gajanan X. Bhonsle, Under Secretary (Estt.), Law.

Porvorim.

——————

Order

Whereas, the Government vide Notification No. 5/40/97/LD(5) dated 17-09-1997, appointed Shri

Ramakant Mahadeo Lotlikar, Advocate (hereinafter referred as the “Applicant”) as a Notary for period of

three years with effect from 17-09-1997, for the area of Judicial Division of Salcete Taluka;

No. 8/5/2026/LD(Estt.)/873

Date : 08-Apr-2026

No. 5/40/97/LD(5)/880

Date : 09-Apr-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

And whereas, the Government vide Certificate of Practice dated 17-09-1997 has certified that the

Applicant is authorized to practice as a Notary for a period of three years from 17-09-1997, for Judicial

Division of Salcete Taluka;

And whereas, the Government on the request of the Applicant had renewed his Certificate of Practice

as a Notary for subsequent 05 terms and the period of validity of the Certificate of Practice expired on

17-09-2025 in the Endorsement dated 03-08-2020 issued to the Applicant. However, vide letter dated

21-01-2026 Adv. Mandar S. Lotlikar, has informed that the above applicant Shri Ramakant Mahadeo

Lotlikar, Advocate who was practicing as a Notary expired on 03-09-2025;

And whereas, the validity of the Endorsement dated 03-08-2020 to the Certificate of Practice issued to

Shri Ramakant Mahadeo Lotlikar stands withdrawn and cancelled, as per the Notaries Act, 1952 (Central

Act 53 of 1952) and Notaries Rules, 1956 (hereinafter referred as the “said Act” and “said Rule”), since the

said Advocate expired on 03-09-2025.

Now therefore, in pursuance of Clause (a) of Section 10 of the said Act, the Government of Goa

hereby removes the name of Applicant entered as a Notary from the Register maintained by it under

Section 4 of the said Act.

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

Gajanan X. Bhonsle, Under Secretary (Estt.), Law.

Porvorim.

———♦♦♦———

Department of Personnel

Order

In terms of Rule 28 of the Goa Civil Service Rules, 2016 and on the recommendation of the Goa

Public Service Commission as conveyed vide its letter No. S2GPSC-LPCF0DOPE/1/2025/I/529/2026/391

dated 06-01-2026 and letter No. S2GPSC-LPCF0DOPE/1/2025/407/I/545/2026 dated 15-01-2026, the

Governor of Goa is pleased to declare the Junior Scale Officers of Goa Civil Service from Sr. No. 1 to 13

below to have satisfactorily completed their period of probation and Officers at Sr. No. 14 to 15 to have

satisfactorily completed their period of probation and confirmed in the cadre of Junior Scale Officers of

Goa Civil Service with effect from the date of completion of probation period mentioned against their

name in column 3 below:-

Sr. No.

Name of the probationers

Date of completion of probation period

(1)

(2)

(3)

Shri Shivprasad S. Naik

20-02-2025

Shri Krishnakant Sakharam Pangam

20-02-2025

Shri Manesh Hari Kedar

20-02-2025

Kum. Prajakta Dina Goltekar

20-02-2025

Shri Bhagwant Anay Karmali

20-02-2025

Shri Prasiddh Prakash Naik

20-02-2025

Shri Shrikant Babi Pednekar

20-02-2025

Shri Amitesh Anant Shirvoikar

20-02-2025

Shri Milindra Ganesh Velip

20-02-2025

10.

Shri Sandeep Sahadev Gawde

20-02-2025

11.

Shri Raghuraj Arun Faldesai

20-02-2025

No. 5/8/2022-PER/Part/362

Date : 04-Feb-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

12.

Smt. Avelina D’sa E Pereira

20-02-2025

13.

Smt. Durga Dwarkanath Kinlekar @ Durga A. Naik

20-02-2025

14.

Shri Pankaj Rane

12-12-2024

15.

Shri Belwadi Samiullah Nishat

11-12-2024

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

Eshant V. Sawant, Joint Secretary (Personnel).

Porvorim.

_____________

Order

On the recommendation of the Goa Services Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order transfer

and posting of the following Junior Scale Officers of Goa Civil Service, in public interest, with immediate

effect:-

Sl. No.

Name and present posting of the officer

Posted as

Shri Prataprao Gaunkar, Deputy Collector &

SDM, Canacona with additional charge of

Chief Officer, Quepem Municipal Council and

Member

Secretary,

Ravindra

Bhavan,

Canacona

Deputy Collector & SDM, Mormugao.

Shri

Bhagwant

Anay

Karmali,

Deputy

Collector & SDM, Mormugao

Deputy Collector & SDM, Canacona with additional

charge of Chief Officer, Quepem Municipal Council

and Member Secretary, Ravindra Bhavan, Canacona.

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.

Raghuraj A. Faldesai, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim.

______________

Order

Shri Raghuraj A. Faldesai, Under Secretary, Personnel-I, shall hold the charge of Under Secretary,

Handicrafts, Textile & Coir and Shri Ratnakant D. Govenker, Deputy Director, Mines-I, shall hold the

charge of Deputy Director, Mines-II, in addition to their own duties with immediate effect.

This issues on the recommendation of Goa Services Board.

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

Durga Kinlekar, Under Secretary (Personnel-II).

Porvorim.

No. 5/3/2026-PER/936

Date : 31-Mar-2026

No. 5/23/2022-PER/949

Date : 01-Apr-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

Order

On the recommendation of the Goa Services Board, the Governor of Goa is pleased to order posting of

the following officers in the cadre of Mamlatdar/Joint Mamlatdar/Vigilance Officer, in public interest, with

immediate effect:-

Sr. No.

Name & present posting of the Officer

Posted as

Shri Shukr Sudin Sinai Usgaonkar,

awaiting posting

Joint Mamlatdar-II, Pernem with additional charge

of Joint Mamlatdar-III, Pernem

Shri Sandesh Thulo Velip, awaiting posting

Joint Mamlatdar-II, Sanguem

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.

Raghuraj A. Faldesai, Under Secretary (Personnel-I).

Porvorim.

———♦♦♦———

Department of Public Health

Notification

In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 26 read with Section 27 of the Surrogacy (Regulation)

Act, 2021 (Central Act No. 47 of 2021), the Government of Goa hereby reconstitutes the Goa State

Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Board consisting of the following members, namely:-

(1)

Minister for Health

—

Chairperson (Ex. Officio)

(2)

Secretary (Health)

—

Vice Chairperson (Ex. Officio)

(3)

Secretary (Law)

—

Member (Ex. Officio)

(4)

Secretary (Women and Child Development)

—

Member (Ex. Officio)

(5)

Secretary (Social Welfare)

—

Member (Ex. Officio)

(6)

Secretary (Home)

—

Member (Ex. Officio)

(7)

Director of Health Services

—

Member (Ex. Officio)

(8)

Mrs. Jennifer Monserrate, Member of Legislative

Assembly of Goa

—

Member

(9)

Dr. (Mrs.) Deviya Rane, Member of Legislative

Assembly of Goa

—

Member

(10)

Mrs. Delilah Lobo, Member of Legislative

Assembly of Goa

—

Member

(11)

Miss Shreya Arundekar, Embryologist

—

Member

(12)

Mr. Chandan Salunke, Embryologist

—

Member

(13)

Dr. Kedar Padte, Obstetrician/IVF Specialist, Panaji

—

Member

(14)

Dr. Muriel Cardoso, HOD, Dept. of OBG, GMC

—

Member

No. 15/7/2025-PER/975

Date : 06-Apr-2026

No. 25/1/2022-I/PHD/260

Date : 25-Feb-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

(15)

Mrs. Shaila D’Souza, Prof. & HOD, Dept. of Women’s

Studies, Goa University

—

Member

(16)

Prof. K. A. Geetha, Faculty-BITS Pilani, Goa

—

Member

(17)

Mrs. Ketki Gadekar- "WOW-Wonders of Outstanding

Women Foundation

—

Member

(18)

Ms. Sayonara Telles-Laad-Beyond Barriers-Towards

Hope

—

Member

(19)

Mrs. Savita Desai – Lok Vishwas Pratistan

—

Member

(20)

Prachi Khandeparkar – ‘Sangath’

—

Member

(21)

Joint Secretary/Addl. Secretary (Health)

—

Member Secretary (Ex. Officio)

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

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

Sitaram G. Sawal, Under Secretary (Health-II).

Porvorim.

——— ♦♦♦———

Department of Revenue

Notification

In exercise of the powers conferred by the second proviso to Clause (ii) of sub-section (6) of Section

32 of the Goa Land Revenue Code, 1968 (Goa Act No. 9 of 1969), the Government of Goa hereby exempts

St. Joseph’s Province Society, 7, Nagar Road, Yervada, Pune, a charitable trust registered under the

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, under Registration Number F-22386 dated 21-08-2007, from the payment

of fees amounting to Rs. 2,01,320/- (Rupees Two lakhs, one thousand, three hundred and twenty only)

payable under the said Code, for conversion of the land admeasuring an area of 1,438 sq. mts., surveyed

under Survey No. 13 sub-division No. 1-AA of Assolda Village of Quepem Taluka, District Kushavati,

State of Goa, subject to the condition that the said land shall be used exclusively for institutional purpose

i.e. construction of a Charitable Old Age Home.

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

Vrushika Kauthankar, Under Secretary (Revenue-I).

Porvorim.

No. 28/4/1/2026/RD-I/460

Date : 07-Apr-2026

OFFICIAL GAZETTE — GOVT. OF GOA

SERIES II No. 3

16TH APRIL, 2026

www.goaprintingpress.gov.in

Published by the Director, Printing & Stationary,

Government Printing Press,

Mahatma Gandhi Road, Panaji-Goa 403 001.

Price—Rs. 15.00

PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT PRINTING PRESS, PANAJI-GOA—29/80-4/2026.