This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्री स.ं डी.एल. (एन) 04/0007/2003—05 REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05 सी.जी.-डी.एलxx.x-GसIDा.H-x1x1x0 92024-257079 CG-DLxx-WxG-I1D1E0x9xx2024-257079 प्राजिकार स ेप्रकाजित PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY साप्त ाजिक WEEKLY स.ं 35] नई दिल्ल ी, जसतम्ब र 1—जसतम्ब र 7, 2024, िजनवार/भाद्र 10—भाद्र 16, 1946 No. 35] NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 1— SEPTEMBER 7, 2024, SATURDAY/BHADRA 10– BHADRA 16, 1946 इस भाग म ेंजभन्न ृ्‍ष स्‍ं ा िी िाती ि जजिसस ेदक ि ृ ष क संकलन के प ृ म ेंर ा िा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation भाग II— ण्ड 3—उृ- ण्ड (ii) PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii) भारत सरकार के मत्रं ाल ों (रक्षा मत्रं ाल को छोड़कर) द्वारा िारी दकए गए साजं वजिक आििे और अजिसूचनाएं Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India (Other than the Ministry of Defence) जवत्त मत्रं ाल (जवत्ती सेवाएं जवभाग) नई दिल्ली, 19 िुलाई, 2024 का.आ. 1682.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड (क) के ृरन्तुक द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, इंजड न बैंक के प्रबंि जनिेिक एव ं मु्‍ का जकारी अजिकारी (एमडी एव ं सीईओ) श्री िाजन्त लाल िजन (िन्म जतज िः 1.1.1965) के का जकाल को दिनांक 1.9.2024 स े 31.12.2024 तक अ वा अगले आििे ों तक, िो भी ृिले िो, बढाती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 4/1/2021-बीओ-I] जवि िंकर जतवारी, अवर सजचव 5449 GI/2024 (3779)3780 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Financial Services) New Delhi, the 19th July, 2024 S.O. 1682.—In exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, Central Government hereby extends the term of Shri Shanti Lal Jain (date of birth: 1.1.1965), Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer (MD & CEO), Indian Bank w.e.f. 01.09.2024 to 31.12.2024, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 4/1/2021-BO-I] VIJAY SHANKAR TIWARI, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1683.—राष्ट्री कषत बैंक (प्रबंि और प्रकीण ज उृबंि) स्ट्कीम, 1970 के ृरज ा 3 के उृ-ृजरा (1) के सा ृठ त बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिजन और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड (ग) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करत े हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, उि सारणी के कॉलम (2) म ें जवजनर्िष्टज व्यजि ों के स्ट् ान ृर नीच े िी गई सारणी के कॉलम (3) म ें जवजनर्िष्टज व्यजि ों को कॉलम (1) म ें जवजनर्िष्टज बकैं ों के बोड ज म ें तत्काल प्रभाव स े और अगल ेआिेिों तक, जनिेिक नाजमत करती ि:ज- क्रम स.ं (1) (2) (3) 1 केनरा बैंक श्री आर. केश्वन श्री रोजित िास (िन्म जतज : 28.9.1970) 2 ूको बैंक श्री रािेि कुमार डॉ. एस. ृी. मोिन्ती (िन्म जतज : 1.7.1972) [फा.सं. 6/3/2011-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 5th August, 2024 S.O. 1683.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, read with sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970, the Central Government hereby nominates the persons specified in column (3) of the table below as Director on the Board of the Banks specified in column (1) thereof, in place of the persons specified in column (2) of the said table, with immediate effect and until further orders:- S. No. (1) (2) (3) 1 Canara Bank Shri R. Kesavan Shri Rohit Das (DOB: 28.09.1970) 2 UCO Bank Shri Rajesh Kumar Dr. S. P. Mohanty (DOB: 01.07.1972) [F. No. 6/3/2011-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1684.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड ( ) द्वारा प्रित् त िजि ों का प्र ोग करत े हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतिद्वारा, श्री भूषण कुमार जसन्िा के स्ट् ान ृर[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3781 श्री मनोि मुट्टजत्तल अय् प्ृन (सं ुि सजचव, भारत सरकार, जवत्त मंत्राल , जवत्ती सेवाए ं जवभाग) को तत्काल प्रभाव स े और अगल ेआिेिों तक, बैंक आफ इंजड ा के बोडज म ेंजनिेिक के ृि ृर नाजमत करती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 6/2/(i)/2022-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 5th August, 2024 S.O. 1684.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Manoj Muttathil Ayyappan (Joint Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services) as Director on the Board of Bank of India, with immediate effect and until further orders, vice Shri Bhushan Kumar Sinha. [eF. No. 6/2/(i)/2022-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1685.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के डं ( ) द्वारा प्रित् त िजि ों का प्र ोग करत े हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतिद्वारा, श्री कार्तजके जमश्र के स्ट् ान ृर सुश्री नीलम अग्रवाल (जनििे क, भारत सरकार, जवत्त मंत्राल , जवत्ती सेवाए ं जवभाग) को तत्काल प्रभाव स े और अगले आिेिों तक, इजण्ड न ओवरसीि बैंक के बोड ज म ें जनििे क के ृि ृर नाजमत करती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 6/2/(ii)/2022-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 5th August, 2024 S.O. 1685.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the Central Government hereby nominates Ms Neelam Agrawal (Director, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services) as Director on the Board of Indian Overseas Bank, with immediate effect and until further orders, vice Shri Kartikeya Misra. [eF. No. 6/2/(ii)/2022-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 7 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1686.—भारती स्ट्टेट बैंक अजिजन म, 1955 (1955 का 23) की िारा 20 की उृ-िारा (1) के सा ृठ त िारा 19 के ण्ड ( ) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, भारती स्ट् टेट बैंक के उृ प्रबंि जनिेिक श्री राणा आितु ोष कुमार ससंि (िन् म जतज : 12.6.1967) को का जभार ग्रिण करने की तारी स े और उनकी अजिवर्षजता की आ ु प्राप्त करन े की तारी (अ ाजत 30.6.2027) तक अ वा अगल े आिेिों तक, िो भी ृिल े िो, भारती स्ट्टेट बैंक (एसबीआई) म ें प्रबंि जनिेिक के ृि ृर जन ुि करती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 2/1/2024-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 7th August, 2024 S.O. 1686.—In exercise of powers conferred by clause (b) of section 19 read with sub-section (1) of section 20 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Rana Ashutosh3782 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Kumar Singh (DoB: 12.06.1967), Deputy Managing Director, State Bank of India (SBI) as Managing Director in SBI with effect from the date of assumption of office and up to the date of his attaining the age of superannuation (i.e. 30.06.2027), or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 2/1/2024-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 7 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1687.—भारती स्ट्टेट बैंक अजिजन म, 1955 (1955 का 23) की िारा 20 की उृ-िारा (1) के सा ृठ त िारा 19 के ण्ड (क) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, भारती स्ट् टेट बैंक के प्रबंि जनिेिक श्री चल्ला श्रीजनवासुलु िेट्टी (िन् म जतज : 26.9.1965) को दिनांक 28.8.2024 को ा उसके बाि का जभार ग्रिण करन े की तारी स े तीन वषज की अवजि के जलए अ वा अगल े आिेिों तक, िो भी ृिल े िो, भारती स्ट्टेट बैंक (एसबीआई) म ेंअध् क्ष के ृि ृर जन िु करती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 2/1/2024-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 7th August, 2024 S.O. 1687.—In exercise of powers conferred by clause (a) of section 19 read with sub-section (1) of section 20 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Challa Sreenivasulu Setty (DoB: 26.09.1965), Managing Director, State Bank of India (SBI) as Chairman, SBI for a period of three years with effect from the date of assumption of charge of the office, on or after 28.08.2024, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 2/1/2024-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1688.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड (क) के ृरन्तुक द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, ूजन न बैंक आफ इंजड ा की मु्‍ मिाप्रबंिक सुश्री बीना विीि (िन्म जतज िः 17.5.1969) को का जभार ग्रिण करने की तारी स े तीन वषज की अवजि के जलए अ वा अगल े आिेिों तक, िो भी ृिले िो, 1,76,800-2,24,000 रुृए (लवे ल 14ए) के वेतनमान म ें बैंक आफ बड़़ौिा म ेंका जृालक जनििे क के ृि ृर जन िु करती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 4/5/(i)/2023-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 9th August, 2024 S.O. 1688.—In exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, Central Government hereby appoints Ms. Beena Vaheed (DoB: 17.05.1969), Chief General Manager, Union Bank of India as Executive Director, Bank of Baroda in the scale of pay Rs. 1,76,800 – 2,24,000 (Level 14A) for a period of three years with effect from the date of assumption of charge of office, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 4/5/(i)/2023-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1689.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिजन और अंतरण) अजिजन म, 1980 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के डं (क) के ृरन्तुक द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, ृंिाब नजिनल बैंक के मु्‍ मिाप्रबंिक श्री रािीवा (िन्म जतज िः 30.6.1968) को का जभार ग्रिण करने की तारी स े तीन वष ज की[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3783 अवजि के जलए अ वा अगल े आिेिों तक, िो भी ृिल े िो, 1,76,800-2,24,000 रुृए (लेवल 14ए) के वेतनमान म ें ृंिाब एंड ससंि बैंक म ें का जृालक जनििे क के ृि ृर जन ुि करती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 4/5/(ii)/2023-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 9th August, 2024 S.O. 1689.—In exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980, Central Government hereby appoints Shri Rajeeva (DoB: 30.06.1968), Chief General Manager, Punjab National Bank as Executive Director, Punjab & Sind Bank in the scale of pay Rs. 1,76,800 – 2,24,000 (Level 14A) for a period of three years with effect from the date of assumption of charge of office, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 4/5/(ii)/2023-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 19 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1690.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड (क) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, इजण्ड न ओवरसीि बैंक के का जृालक जनिेिक श्री िॉ िीृ ित्ता रॉ (िन्म जतज िः 1.7.1972) के का जकाल को दिनांक 20.10.2024 स े आगे एक वषज की अवजि के जलए अ वा अगल े आिेिों तक, िो भी ृिल े िो, बढाती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 4/2/(i)/2024-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 19th August, 2024 S.O. 1690.—In exercise of powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the Central Government hereby extends the term of office of Shri Joydeep Dutta Roy (DoB: 01.07.1972), Executive Director, Indian Overseas Bank for a period of one year beyond 20.10.2024, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 4/2/(i)/2024-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 19 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1691.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड (क) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, बैंक आफ मिाराष्ट्र के का जृालक जनिेिक श्री आिीष ृाण्डे (िन्म जतज िः 24.6.1971) के का जकाल को दिनांक 30.12.2024 स े आग े िो वष ज की अवजि के जलए अ वा अगल े आििे ों तक, िो भी ृिल े िो, बढाती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 4/2/(ii)/2024-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 19th August, 2024 S.O. 1691.—In exercise of powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the Central Government hereby extends the term of office of Shri Asheesh Pandey (DoB: 24.06.1971), Executive Director, Bank of Maharashtra for a period of two years beyond 30.12.2024, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 4/2/(ii)/2024-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy.3784 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली, 19 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1692.—बैंककारी कंृनी (उृक्रमों का अिनज और अतं रण) अजिजन म, 1970 की िारा 9 की उृ-िारा (3) के ंड (क) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करत े हुए, केन्द्री सरकार, एतद्द्वारा, ृंिाब नजिनल बैंक के का जृालक जनिेिक श्री कल् ाण कुमार (िन्म जतज िः 10.1.1969) के का जकाल को दिनांक 20.10.2024 स े आग े िो वष ज की अवजि के जलए अ वा अगले आिेिों तक, िो भी ृिले िो, बढाती ि।ज [ई फा. स.ं 4/2/(iii)/2024-बीओ-I] संि कुमार जमश्र, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 19th August, 2024 S.O. 1692.—In exercise of powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, the Central Government hereby extends the term of office of Shri Kalyan Kumar (DoB: 10.01.1969), Executive Director, Punjab National Bank for a period of two years beyond 20.10.2024, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. [eF. No. 4/2/(iii)/2024-BO-I] SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, Under Secy. सिकाठरता मत्रं ाल नई दिल्ली, 27 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1693.—बहु-राज् ी सिकारी सजमजत अजिजन म, 2002 (2002 का 39) के ंड 4 के उृ ंड (1) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करत े हुए एव ं भारत सरकार की अजिसूचना सं. एल-11012/2/2003-एल एव ं एम दिनांक 11 माच,ज 2024 के अजिक्रमण में, केन्द्र सरकार एततद्वारा, श्री रबीन्द्र कुमार अग्रवाल, भारती प्रिासजनक सेवा (केरला- 1997), अृर सजचव (सिकाठरता) को सिकाठरता मंत्राल , भारत सरकार में तत्काल प्रभाव से एवं अगल े आिेिों तक सिकारी सजमजत ों के केन्द्री ृंिी क के प ृ में जन िु करती ि।ज [फा. स.ं एल-11012/2/2003-एल एव ंएम)] अवनीि रस्ट्तोगी, अवर सजचव MINISTRY OF COOPERATION New Delhi, the 27th August, 2024 S.O. 1693.—In exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 (39 of 2002) and in supersession of the Government of India Notification No. L-11012/2/2003-L&M dated 11.03.2024, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Rabindra Kumar Agarwal, IAS, (KL-1997), Additional Secretary (Cooperation) in the Ministry of Cooperation, Government of India as the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies with immediate effect and until further orders. [F. No. L-11012/2/2003-L&M)] AVNISH RASTOGI, Under Secy. सस्ट्ं क षजत मत्रं ाल नई दिल्ली, 30 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1694.—केंद्र सरकार, रािभाषा (संघ के िासकी प्र ोिनों के जलए प्र ोग) जन म, 1976 के जन म 10 के उृ जन म (4) के अनुसरण में संस्ट् कषजत मंत्राल के अतं गतज आने वाल े का ाजल , रा्‍र ी अजभले ागार, अजभले केन द्र , 10-ए, झालाना सांस्ट् ाजनक क्षत्रे , झालाना डूंगरी, ि ृुर जिनमें 80 प्रजतित स े अजिक अजिकाठर ों/कमजचाठर ों न े सििं ी का का जसािक ज्ञान प्राप् त कर जल ा ि,ज को अजिसूजचत करती ि।ज ि अजिसूचना रािृत्र में प्रकािन की तारी से प्रवषत् त िोगी। [फा. सं. ई.13016/1/2024- सििं ी] गुरमीत ससंि चावला, सं ुक् त सजचव[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3785 MINISTRY OF CULTURE New Delhi, the 30th August, 2024 S.O. 1694.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for official purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies the office National Archives, Records Centre, 10-A, Jhalana Institutional Area, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur under Ministry of Culture wherein more than 80% officers/staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi. This notification shall come into force from the date of publication in the Official Gazette. [F. No. E.13016/1/2024-Hindi] GURMEET SINGH CHAWLA, Jt. Secy. ृरे ोजल म और प्राकषजतक गसज मत्रं ाल नई दिल्ली, 28 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1695.—केन्द्री सरकार ने ृेरोजल म और जनि ृाइृलाइन (भूजम में उृ ोग के अजिकार का अिजन) अजिजन म,1962(1962 का 50) की िारा 6 की उृिारा (1) के अिीन िारी की गई भारत सरकार के ृेरोजल म और प्राकषजतक गजस मंत्राल की नीच े िी गई अनुसूची म ें ा उजल्लज त तारी ों एवम का. आ. द्वारा उन अजिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची म ें जवजनर्िष्टज भूजम में उृ ोग के अजिकार का अिजन दक ा ा| और केन्द्री सरकार न,े उि अजिजन म की िारा 6 की उृिारा (4) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करते हुए, उि भूजम ों में, सभी जवल्लगं मों स े मुि, उृ ोग का अजिकार आई एचबी जलजमटेड में जनजित दक ा ा| और सक्षम प्राजिकारी न े केन्द्री सरकार को ठरृोट ज िी ि ज दक ृेरोजल म उत्ृाि के ृठरविन के जलए मध् -प्रिेि राज् म ें आई एच बी जलजमटेड की कांडला गोर ृुर एल.ृी.िी. ृाइृलाइन जबछाई िा चकु ी ि,ैं अतिः उस भूजम के बारे म,ें जिसका संजक्षप्त जववरण इस अजिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में जवजनर्िष्टज दक ा ग ा ि,ैं ऐसे प्रचालन को मध् -प्रिेि राज् म ें समाप्त दक ा िाए| अतिः अब, केन्द्री सरकार, ृेरोजल म और जनि ृाइृलाइन(भूजम म ें उृ ोग के अजिकार का अिजन)1963 के जन म 4 के स्ट्ृष्टीकरण – 1 के अिीन उस तारी को जिस ृर ि अजिसूचना भारत के रािृत्र में प्रकाजित िोती ि,ैं मध् - प्रिेि राज् के झाबुआ एव ं िार जिले के नीचे वर्णजत गााँवो में मागाजजिकार गजतजवजि ों की समाप्ती की तारी के प ृ म ें घोजषत करती ि ैं| अनसु चू ी जिला: झाबआु राज् : मध् प्रििे क्रमांक का. आ. स.ं एव ंदिनाकं ग्राम का नाम तिसील (1) (2) (3) (4) का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 1. काला ुंट झाबुआ का.आ. 4822(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 2. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 ाटाृानी झाबुआ 3. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 बावड़ीबड़ी झाबुआ 4. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 काकरािरा ुिज झाबुआ 5. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 मोि झाबुआ 6. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 गेलरछोटी झाबुआ 7. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 बलवन झाबुआ का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 8. काचला झाबुआ का.आ. 4822(अ) दिनांक10.10.20223786 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 9. झा डा झाबुआ का.आ. 2281(अ) दिनांक08.05.2023 10. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 अन्तरवेजल ा झाबुआ 11. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 कल्लीृुरा झाबुआ 12. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 ुटावा झाबुआ 13. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 ा र ेडी झाबुआ 14. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 मानृुरा झाबुआ 15. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 भगोर झाबुआ 16. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 एिनृुरा झाबुआ 17. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 गोृालृुरा झाबुआ 18. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 नवाृाडा नवीन झाबुआ 19. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 आमलीृ ार झाबुआ 20. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 बडलीृाडा झाबुआ 21. का.आ. 2535 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 लोिाठर ा झाबुआ 22. का.आ. 2531(अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 मो ड़ा मेघनगर का.आ. 2531(अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 23. ििे ला मेघनगर का.आ. 4822(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 24. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 बेडिा ृेटलावि 25. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 झावजल ा ृेटलावि 26. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 रल् ावन ृेटलावि 27. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 सो ेला ृेटलावि 28. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 अलस्ट् ा ेजड ृेटलावि 29. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 घोडा ल ृेटलावि 30. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 मा ुरी ा ृेटलावि का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 31. बनी ृेटलावि का.आ. 2281(अ) दिनांक08.05.2023 32. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 सामली ृेटलावि का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 33. कचरा िान ृेटलावि का.आ. 2281(अ) दिनांक08.05.2023 34. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 गुलरीृाडा ृेटलावि 35. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 सलुजन ा बडा ृेटलावि 36. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 नािरगढ ृेटलावि का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 37. बजकल्िा ृेटलावि का.आ. 4822(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3787 38. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 बडलीृाडा ृेटलावि 39. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 का ारेल ृेटलावि 40. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 भूठरघाटी ृेटलावि 41. का.आ. 2533 (अ) दिनांक 18.06.2021 भील कोटडा ृेटलावि जिला: िार राज् : मध् प्रििे का.आ. 0824 (अ) दिनांक22.02.2022 1. ो ठर ाघाट सरिारृुर का.आ. 2279(अ) दिनांक08.05.2023 का.आ. 0825(अ) दिनांक22.02.2022 का.आ. 4251(अ) दिनांक12.09.2022 2. सलवा सरिारृुर का.आ. 4819(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 का.आ. 2279(अ) दिनांक08.05.2023 का.आ. 0825(अ) दिनांक22.02.2022 3. लाबठर ा सरिारृुर का.आ. 2279(अ) दिनांक08.05.2023 का.आ. 0825 (अ) दिनांक 22.02.2022 4. बरमण्डल सरिारृुर का.आ. 4819(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 5. का.आ. 2963(अ) दिनांक 22.07.2021 बर ेडा सरिारृुर 6. का.आ. 2963(अ) दिनांक 22.07.2021 ुटृला सरिारृुर 7. का.आ. 2963(अ) दिनांक 22.07.2021 चन्ि़ौजड ा सरिारृुर 8. का.आ. 2963(अ) दिनांक 22.07.2021 बणी सरिारृुर 9. का.आ. 4193 (अ) दिनांक 7.10.2021 दकसनृुरा बिनावर 10. का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 मानृुर बिनावर का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 11. इंद्रावल बिनावर का.आ. 1438(अ) दिनांक22.03.2022 का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 12. का.आ. 4819(अ) दिनांक 10.10.2022 काडोिकला बिनावर का.आ. 2279(अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 13. का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 सीलोिा ुि ज बिनावर 14. का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 गोृाल ेड़ी बिनावर 15. का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 छा न ुि ज बिनावर 16. का.आ. 4193 (अ)दिनांक 07.10.2021 ृंचमु ी बिनावर 17. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 काराजड ा िार 18. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 बेरछा िार 19. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 छाृर िार 20. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 सृंिरा ा िार3788 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] का.आ.4819(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 21. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 जबलोिा िार का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 22. तीसगांव िार का.आ.4819(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 23. जभडोता ुि ज िार का.आ.4819(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 24. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 रामृुर िार 25. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 बालोिा बुिुगज िार 26. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 गवला िार 27. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 अकोल् ा िार का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 28. गोजवन्िृुरा िार का.आ.4819(अ) दिनांक10.10.2022 29. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 माचकिा िार 30. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 बग्गड िार 31. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 एकलिनु ािार िार 32. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 सु ंडा िार 33. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 नेकृुर िार 34. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 बडछाृरा िार 35. का.आ. 2965 (अ)दिनांक 22.07.2021 ग् ासाबाि िार [फा. सं. आर-11025(15)/5/2020-ओआर-I/ृाटज(2)/ई-45913] िजि िे र ससंि, अवर सजचव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS New Delhi, the 28th August, 2024 S.O. 1695.—Whereas, by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, S. O. Numbers and Dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub-section (i) of section 6 of Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government acquired the Right of User in the lands specified in the schedule appended to those notifications. AND WHEREAS, in exercise of the powers conferred by the Sub-Section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the Right of user in the lands free from all encumbrances in the IHB Limited. AND WHEREAS, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline has been laid for the purpose of transportation of LPG in the said lands and hence such operation may be terminated for KandlaGorakhpur LPG Pipeline Project in the state of Madhya Pradesh in respect of the said lands which in brief are specified in the Schedule annexed to the Notification; “Now, therefore, as required under explanation–1 of rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules 1963, the Central Government hereby declare the dates on which this notification is Right Published in the Gazette of India as the date of “Termination of Operation” in ROU Village mentioned in Jhabua and Dhar district in the state of Madhya Pradesh.[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3789 SCHEDULE District: Jhabua State: Madhya Pradesh Sl.No. S.O. No. & Date Name of Village Name of Tehsil (1) (2) (3) (4) 1. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Kalakhunt Jhabua S.O. No. 4822(E) dated10.10.2022 2. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Khatapani Jhabua 3. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bawadibadi Jhabua 4. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Kakradarakhurd Jhabua 5. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Mod Jhabua 6. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Gelarchhoti Jhabua 7. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Balwan Jhabua 8. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Kachala Jhabua S.O. No. 4822(E) dated10.10.2022 9. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Jhayda Jhabua S.O. No. 2281(E) dated08.05.2023 10. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Antarveliya Jhabua 11. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Kallipura Jhabua 12. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Khutawa Jhabua 13. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Khakharkhedi Jhabua 14. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Manpura Jhabua 15. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bhagor Jhabua 16. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Aejanpura Jhabua 17. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Gopalpura Jhabua 18. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Nawapada Jhabua 19. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Amlipathar Jhabua 20. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Badlipada Jhabua 21. S.O. No. 2535 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Lohariya Jhabua 22. S.O. No. 2531(E) dated 18.06.2021 Mokhada Meghnagar 23. S.O. No. 2531(E) dated 18.06.2021 Dedla Meghnagar S.O. No. 4822(E) dated10.10.2022 24. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bedada Petlawad 25. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Jhawalia Petlawad 26. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Ralyawan Petlawad 27. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Soila Petlawad 28. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Alasyakhedi Petlawad 29. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Ghodathal Petlawad 30. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Mathuria Petlawad 31. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bani Petlawad S.O. No. 2281(E) dated08.05.2023 32. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Samli Petlawad 33. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Kachrakhadan Petlawad S.O. No. 2281(E) dated08.05.2023 34. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Gularipada Petlawad 35. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Saluniyabada Petlawad 36. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Nahargarh Petlawad 37. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bekalda Petlawad3790 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] S.O. No. 4822(E) dated10.10.2022 38. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Baldipada Petlawad 39. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Kayarel Petlawad 40. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bhurighati Petlawad 41. S.O. No. 2533 (E) dated 18.06.2021 Bheelkotda Petlawad District: Dhar State: Madhya Pradesh 1. S.O. No. 0824(E) dated22.02.2022 Khakhariyaghat Sardarpur S.O. No. 2279(E) dated08.05.2023 2. S.O. No. 0825(E) dated22.02.2022 S.O. No. 4251(E) dated12.09.2022 Salwa Sardarpur S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 S.O. No. 2279(E) dated08.05.2023 3. S.O. No. 0825(E) dated22.02.2022 Labariya Sardarpur S.O. No. 2279(E) dated08.05.2023 4. S.O. No. 0825 (E) dated 22.02.2022 Barmandal Sardarpur S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 5. S.O. No. 2963(E) dated 22.07.2021 Barkheda Sardarpur 6. S.O. No. 2963(E) dated 22.07.2021 Khuntpala Sardarpur 7. S.O. No. 2963(E) dated 22.07.2021 Chandodiya Sardarpur 8. S.O. No. 2963(E) dated 22.07.2021 Bani Sardarpur 9. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Kisanpura Badnawar 10. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Manpura Badnawar 11. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Indrawal Badnawar S.O. No. 1438(E) dated22.03.2022 12. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 Kadodkalan Badnawar S.O. No. 2279(E) dated08.05.2023 13. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Silodakhurd Badnawar 14. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Gopal khedi Badnawar 15. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Chhayankhurd Badnawar 16. S.O. No. 4193 (E) dated 07.10.2021 Panchmukhi Badnawar 17. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Karadiya Dhar 18. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Berchha Dhar 19. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Chhapar Dhar 20. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Pinjraya Dhar S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 21. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Biloda Dhar 22. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Tisgaon Dhar S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 23. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Bhidotakhurd Dhar S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 24. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Rampur Dhar 25. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Balodabuzurg Dhar 26. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Gawala Dhar 27. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Akoliya Dhar 28. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Govindpura Dhar S.O. No. 4819(E) dated10.10.2022 29. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Machakda Dhar[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3791 30. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Baggad Dhar 31. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Akaldunadhar Dhar 32. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Sukheda Dhar 33. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Nekpur Dhar 34. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Badchhapra Dhar 35. S.O. No. 2965 (E) dated 22.07.2021 Gyasabad Dhar [F. No. R- 11025(15)/5/2020-OR-I/Part(2)/E-45913] SHASHI SHEKHAR SINGH, Under Secy. नई दिल्ली, 4 जसतम्ब र, 2024 का.आ. 1696.—केन्द्री सरकार न े ृेरोजल म और जनि ृाइृलाइन (भूजम म े उृ ोग के अजिकार का अिजन) अजिजन म, 1962 (1962 का 50) की िारा 6 की उृिारा (1) अिीन िारी की गई भारत सरकार के ृेरोजल म और प्राकषजतक गजस मंत्राल की नीच े िी गई अनुसूची मे ा उजल्लज त तारी ों की एवम का.आ. द्वारा उन अजिसूचनाओं स े संलग्न अनुसूची म ेजवजनर्िष्टज भूजम म ें उृ ोग के अजिकार का अिजन दक ा ा। और केन्द्री सरकार न,े उि अजिजन म की िारा 6 की उृिारा (4) द्वारा प्रित्त िजि ों का प्र ोग करत े हुए, उि भूजम ो म,ें सभी जवल्लगं मों से मुि, उृ ोग का अजिकार जिन्िस्ट्ु तान ृेरोजल म कॉृोरेिन जलजमटेड (एच.ृी.सी.एल) में जनजित दक ा ा। और सक्षम प्राजिकारी न े केन्द्री सरकार को ठरृोटज िी ि ज दक ृेरोजल म उत्ृाि के ृठरविन के जलए तले गं ाना राज् में जिन्िस्ट्ु तान ृेरोजल म कॉृोरेिन जलजमटेड (एच.ृी.सी.एल) की िासन (कनाजटका) से चेरलाृल्ली (तेलगं ाना) एलृीिी ृाइृलाइन जबछाई िा चुकी ि,ज अत: उस भूजम के बारे म,े जिसका संजक्षप्त जववरण इस अजिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से जवजनर्िष्टज दक ा ग ा िज, ऐसे प्रचालन को तले गं ाना राज् मे समाप्त दक ा िाए। अत: अब, केन्द्री सरकार, ृेरोजल म और जनि ृाइृलाइन (भूजम म ें उृ ोग के अजिकार का अिनज ) अजिजन म, 1963 के जन म 4 के स्ट्ृष्टीकरण -1 के अिीन उन तारी ों को जिन ृर ि अजिसूचना भारत के रािृत्र म े प्रकाजित िोती ि,ज तेलगं ाना राज् के िोगलु ाबं ा गड़वाल, वनृर ी, मिबबू नगर, नागरकरनलू , रंगारेड्डी और मडे चल मलकािीजगरी जिल ेके नीचे वर्णजत गााँवो मे मागाजजिकार गजतजवजि ो की समाप्ती की तारी के प ृ मे घोजषत करती ि ज। अनसु चू ी जिला: िोगुलांबा गड़वाल राज् : तेलंगाना क्रमांक का. आ. सं. एवं दिनांक गााँव का नाम मंडल का नाम (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1720 (अ) दिनांक 01.06.2020 कोरवीृाडु 2 723 (अ) दिनांक 17.02.2021 गोकुलृाड़ 3 3877 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 मनोृाड़ 4 1391 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 िल्लाृुर मनोृाड़ 5 5270 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 बोरवल्ली 6 829 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 ृल्लेृाडु 7 मंगमृेट जिला: वनृर ी राज् : तेलंगाना क्रमांक का. आ. सं. एवं दिनांक गााँव का नाम मंडल का नाम (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1716 (अ) दिनांक 01.06.2020 बुरिीृाडु ृेब्बेर3792 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 2 3299 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 िुकुर 3 3784 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 रामेश्वरृुर 4 3878 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 ृा ृल्ली 5 1390 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 चेलीजमल्ला 6 5271 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 कांचीरावृल्ली 7 827 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 8 1719 (अ) दिनांक 01.06.2020 वेंकटाृुर 9 3532 (अ) दिनांक 07.10.2020 श्रीरंगाृुर 10 3297 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 कंबालाृुर श्रीरंगाृुर 11 3796 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 ाटीृामुला 12 3879 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 13 1380 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 14 4913 (अ) दिनांक 14.10.2022 15 3492 (अ) दिनांक 05.10.2020 सवाईगुडम 16 3867 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 नाचिल्ली 17 1392 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 दकस्ट्टाजगरी 18 4914 (अ) दिनांक 14.10.2022 ृेद्दागुडेम वनृर ी 19 830 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 रािाृेट 20 3493 (अ) दिनांक 05.10.2020 रािानगर 21 1396 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 अचुताृुर 22 4915 (अ) दिनांक 14.10.2022 जचत् ाला 23 831 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 ृेद्दामंिाड़ी 24 1718 (अ) दिनांक 01.06.2020 जचन्नामंिाडी ृेद्दामंिाड़ी 25 3534 (अ) दिनांक 07.10.2020 ृामीरेड्डीृल्ली 26 3300 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 जवराईृल्ली 27 3798 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 सोलीृुर 28 3875 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 मनािीृेट 29 1379 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 मल्काृुर घनृुर 30 5272 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 घनृुर 31 826 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 आगारम 32 कमलुिीनृुर 33 ीरमलाईृल्ली जिला: मिबूबनगर राज् : तेलंगाना क्रमांक का. आ. सं. एवं दिनांक गााँव का नाम मंडल का नाम (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 2248 (अ) दिनांक 07.07.2020 कप्ृेटा 2 3298 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 ृात मोलगरा 3 3799 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 कोत मोलगरा भूतृुर 4 3873 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 भूतृुर 5 1393 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 कोतुर[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3793 6 5274 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 ताजडृरती 7 825 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 8 2508 (अ) दिनांक 29.07.2020 सचंतबोइनृल्ली 9 1378 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 आलूर 10 3303 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 बुरगुृल्ली 11 3797 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 नागसाला िड़चेरला 12 3876 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 नसरुल्लाबाि 13 5273 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 गंगाृुर 14 3533 (अ) दिनांक 07.10.2020 गोृुलाृुरम 15 3795 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 कोडगल 16 3301 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 17 1382 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 ईडगाणृल्ली रािाृुर 18 828 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 19 2507 (अ) दिनांक 29.07.2020 जतरुमलजगरी 20 3872 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 मोिृं ल्ली 21 1387 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 ृेद्दारेवल्ली बालानगर 22 5276 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 िमे ािीृुर 23 सलंगारम जिला: नागरकरनूल राज् : तेलंगाना क्रमांक का. आ. सं. एवं दिनांक गााँव का नाम मंडल का नाम (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 2252 (अ) दिनांक 07.07.2020 2 3880 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 मठरकलकुरि ु ज मािीृेट 3 1381 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 जिला: रंगारेड्डी राज् : तेलंगाना क्रमांक का. आ. सं. एवं दिनांक गााँव का नाम मंडल का नाम (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 3061 (अ) दिनांक 02.09.2020 इप्ृालृल्ली 2 4288 (अ) दिनांक 26.11.2020 वेमुलानवज केिमृेट 3 5277(अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 संगम 4 832 (अ) दिनांक 08.05.2023 एक्लास ानृेट 5 1721 (अ) दिनांक 01.06.2020 जसद्धाृुर 6 4284 (अ) दिनांक 26.11.2020 भद्राईृल्ली को ुर 7 1386 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 कोडीचेलाज3794 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 8 5279 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 9 2462 (अ) दिनांक 27.07.2020 कोडालाृड़कल 10 4287 (अ) दिनांक 26.11.2020 सुभानृुर 11 1384 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2020 कल्वाकोले 12 5275 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 अमीरृेट मिश्वे रम 13 2461 (अ) दिनांक 27.07.2020 तुृरा ुिज 14 1383 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 नागीरेड्डीृल्ली 15 3302 (अ) दिनांक 10.08.2021 गोल्लूर 16 3785 (अ) दिनांक 08.09.2021 नंिीृल्ली 17 4916 (अ) दिनांक 14.10.2022 डोंड िंकराृुर 18 4286 (अ) दिनांक 26.11.2020 संगीगुड़ा समसाबाि 19 3871 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 गोलकुंडा ुिज 20 5278 (अ) दिनांक 03.11.2022 बचाराम अब्िल्ु लाृुरमेट जिला: मेडचल मलकािीजगरी राज् : तेलंगाना क्रमांक का. आ. सं. एवं दिनांक गााँव का नाम मंडल का नाम (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1717 (अ) दिनांक 01.06.2020 मनमृेट 2 4285 (अ) दिनांक 26.11.2020 इस्ट्माइल ानगुड़ा घटकेसर 3 3874 (अ) दिनांक 16.09.2021 कोरेमुल्ला 4 1385 (अ) दिनांक 22.03.2022 अन्नोजिगुड्डा 5 रामृल्ली कीसरा [फा. स.ं आर-12031/2/2019-ओ.आर-आई/ई-31417] एस. एस. ससंि, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 4th September, 2024 S.O. 1696.—Whereas, by a notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, S.O. numbers and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub-section (i) of section 6, Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government acquired the Right of User in the said lands specified in the Schedules appended to those notifications. AND WHEREAS, in exercise of the powers conferred by the Sub-Section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the Right of User in the said lands free from all encumbrances in the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited; AND WHEREAS, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline has been laid for the purpose of transportation of LPG, in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated from Hassan (Karnataka) to Cherlapalli (Telangana) Pipeline Project in the state of Telangana in respect of the said lands which in brief are specified in the Schedule annexed to the Notification; “Now, therefore, as required under explanation – 1 of rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules 1963, the Central Government hereby declare the dates on which the notification is published in the Gazette of India as the date of “Termination of Operation” in ROU Village mentioned in Jogulamba Gadwal, Wanaparthy, Mahbubnagar, Nagarkurnool, Rangareddy and Medchal Malkajigiri district in the state of Telangana.”[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3795 SCHEDULE District: Jogulamba Gadwal State: Telangana Sl. No. S.O. No. & Date Name of the Village Name of the Mandal (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1720(E) Date 01.06.2020 Korvipadu 2 723(E) Date 17.02.2021 Gokulapad 3 3877(E) Date 16.09.2021 Manopad Manopad 4 1391(E) Date 22.03.2022 Jallapur 5 5270(E) Date 03.11.2022 Boravalle 6 829(E) Date 08.05.2023 Pallepadu 7 Mangampet District: Wanaparthy State: Telangana Sl.No. S.O. No. & Date Name of the Village Name of the Mandal (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1716(E) Date 01.06.2020 Burdipadu 2 3299(E) Date 10.08.2021 Shukur 3 3784(E) Date 08.09.2021 Rameshwarpur 4 3878(E) Date 16.09.2021 Pathapalli Pebbair 5 1390(E) Date 22.03.2022 Chellimilla 6 5271(E) Date 03.11.2022 Kanchiraopalle 7 827(E) Date 08.05.2023 8 1719(E) Date 01.06.2020 Venkatapura 9 3532(E) Date 07.10.2020 Srirangapur 10 3297(E) Date 10.08.2021 Kambalapur Srirangapur 11 3796(E) Date 08.09.2021 Thatipamula 12 3879(E) Date 16.09.2021 13 1380(E) Date 22.03.2022 14 4913(E) Date 14.10.2022 15 3492(E) Date 05.10.2020 Savaegudem 16 3867(E) Date 16.09.2021 Natchahalli 17 1392(E) Date 22.03.2022 Kistagiri 18 4914(E) Date 14.10.2022 Peddagudem Wanaparthy 19 830(E) Date 08.05.2023 Rajapet 20 3493(E) Date 05.10.2020 Rajanagar 21 1396(E) Date 22.03.2022 Achutapur 22 4915(E) Date 14.10.2022 Chityala 23 831(E) Date 08.05.2023 Peddamandadi 24 1718(E) Date 01.06.2020 Chinnamandadi Peddamandadi 25 3534(E) Date 07.10.2020 Pamireddipalle 26 3300(E) Date 10.08.2021 Veeraipalle 27 3798(E) Date 08.09.2021 Solipur 28 3875(E) Date 16.09.2021 Manajipeta 29 1379(E) Date 22.03.2022 Malkapur Ghanpur 30 5272(E) Date 03.11.2022 Ghanpur 31 826(E) Date 08.05.2023 Agaram 32 Kamaluddinpur 33 Thirmalaipalli3796 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] District: Mahbubnagar State: Telangana Sl.No. S.O. No. & Date Name of the Village Name of the Mandal (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 2248(E) Date 07.07.2020 Kappeta 2 3298(E) Date 10.08.2021 Patha Molgara 3 3799(E) Date 08.09.2021 Kotha Molgara 4 3873(E) Date 16.09.2021 Bhoothpur Bhoothpur 5 1393(E) Date 22.03.2022 Kothur 6 5274(E) Date 03.11.2022 Tadparti 7 825(E) Date 08.05.2023 8 2508(E) Date 29.07.2020 Chinaboinpalle 9 1378(E) Date 22.03.2022 Alur 10 3303(E) Date 10.08.2021 Boorgupally 11 3797(E) Date 08.09.2021 Nagasal Jadcherla 12 3876(E) Date 16.09.2021 Nasrullabad 13 5273(E) Date 03.11.2022 Gangapur 14 3533(E) Date 07.10.2020 Gopulapuram 15 3795(E) Date 08.09.2021 Kodgal 16 3301(E) Date 10.08.2021 17 1382(E) Date 22.03.2022 Edganpalle Rajapur 18 828(E) Date 08.05.2023 19 2507(E) Date 29.07.2020 Thirumalagiri 20 3872(E) Date 16.09.2021 Modampalli 21 1387(E) Date 22.03.2022 Peddarevelly Balanagar 22 5276(E) Date 03.11.2022 Hemajipur 23 Lingaram District: Nagarkurnool State: Telangana Sl.No. S.O. No. & Date Name of the Village Name of the Mandal (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 2252(E) Date 07.07.2020 2 3880(E) Date 16.09.2021 Marikalkurdu Thimmajipet 3 1381(E) Date 22.03.2022 District: Rangareddy State: Telangana Sl.No. S.O. No. & Date Name of the Village Name of the Mandal (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 3061(E) Date 02.09.2020 Ippalapalle 2 4288(E) Date 26.11.2020 Vemulanarva Keshampet 3 5277E) Date 03.11.2022 Sangam 4 832(E) Date 08.05.2023 Eklaskanpet 5 1721(E) Date 01.06.2020 Siddapur 6 4284(E) Date 26.11.2020 Bhadraipally Kothur 7 1386(E) Date 22.03.2022 Kodicherla 8 5279(E) Date 03.11.2022 9 2462(E) Date 27.07.2020 Kodlapadakal 10 4287(E) Date 26.11.2020 Subhanpur 11 1384(E) Date 22.03.2020 Kalwakole Maheswaram 12 5275(E) Date 03.11.2022 Ameerpet 13 2461(E) Date 27.07.2020 Toopra Khurd[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3797 14 1383(E) Date 22.03.2022 Nagireddipalle 15 3302(E) Date 10.08.2021 Gollor 16 3785(E) Date 08.09.2021 Nandipalli 17 4916(E) Date 14.10.2022 Dond Shankarapura 18 4286(E) Date 26.11.2020 Sanghiguda Shamshabad 19 3871(E) Date 16.09.2021 Golkonda Khurd 20 5278(E) Date 03.11.2022 Bacharam Abdullapurmet District: Medchal Malkajigiri State: Telangana Sl.No. S.O. No. & Date Name of the Village Name of the Mandal (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1717(E) Date 01.06.2020 Yemnampet 2 4285(E) Date 26.11.2020 Ismailkhanguda Ghatkesar 3 3874(E) Date 16.09.2021 Korremula 4 1385(E) Date 22.03.2022 Annojiguda 5 Rampalli Keesra [F. No. R-12031/2/2019-OR-I/E-31417] S. S. SINGH, Under Secy. Je ,oa jkstxkj ea=ky; नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्ट् त, 2024 का.आ. 1697.—vkS?kksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 (a1947 dk 14) dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k es a dsUnzh; ljdkj स्ट्टेट बैंक ऑफ़ इंजड ा ds izca/kr=] lac) fu;kstdks vkSj muds deZdkjks ds chp vucq a/k eas fufnZ’V vkS?kksfxd fookn es a dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS?kksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] भुबनश्वे र ds iapkV (72/2021) izdkf'kr djrh gSA [स.ं एल-12011/42/2020-आई.आर(बी-I)] सलोनी, उृ जनिेिक MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi, the 29th August, 2024 S.O. 1697.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 72/2021) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workmen. [No. L-12011/42/2020-IR(B-I)] SALONI, Dy. Director ANNEXURE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT BHUBANESWAR Present: Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer, C.G.I.T.-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 72/2021 Date of Passing Order – 21st June, 20243798 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Between :- The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Bhubaneswar, Orissa – 759 024. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Balichandrapur Branch, Balichandrapur, Jajpur – 754 205. … 1st Party-Managements. (And) The President, State Bank of India Karmachari Union (CITU) VR-5/1, Kharvela Nagar, Unit-3, Bhubaneswar – 1. … 2nd Party-Union. Appearances: None. … For the 1st Party-Managements. None. … For the 2nd Party-Union. ORDER In the present case, a reference was received from the Section Officer to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi vide order No. L-12011/42/2020 – IR(B-I), dated 04.01.2020 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication of a dispute, under the following schedule:- “Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in denying the benefits like stagnation of wage revision and withdrawal of medical allowance to Shri Bhagirathi Nayak, Temporary messenger is legal and/or justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?” 2. In the reference order, the Under Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment, New Delhi commanded the parties raising the dispute to file statement of claim, complete with relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses with this Tribunal within 15 days of receipt of the reference order and to forward a copy of such statement of claim to each one of the opposite parties involved in the dispute. 3. Despite directions so given, no statement of claim is received from the 2nd party-Union. 4. On receipt of the above reference, notice was sent to the 2nd Party-Union 20.12.2021, 29.06.2022 and finally on 02.05.2023 for appearance and for filing of statement of claim. Neither the postal article sent to the 2nd Party- Union, referred to above, was received back nor was it observed by the Tribunal that postal services remained unserved in the period, referred to above. Therefore, every presumption lies in favour of the fact that the above notices were served upon the 2nd Party- Union. Despite service of the notice, the 2nd Party-Union opted to abstain away from the proceedings. No claim statement was filed on its behalf. Thus, it is clear that the 2nd Party-Union is not interested in adjudication of the reference on merits. 5. Since the 2nd Party-Union has neither filed statement of claim nor has led any evidence so as to prove its cause against the Management, it is presumed that there is no claim of workman against the Management. 6. In view of such, no claim Order is passed by this Tribunal. 7. Let this order be sent to the appropriate Government, as required under Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for publication. Dictated & Corrected by me. DINESH KUMAR SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 4 जसतम्ब र, 2024 का.आ. 1698.—औद्योजगक जववाि अजिजन म (1947 का 14) की िारा 17 के अनुसरण म,ें केन्द्री सरकार मसे स ज एचृीसीएल बा ोफ् ल्ू स जलजमटेड के प्रबंितंत्र के संबद्ध जन ोिकों और श्री सरू ि कुमार के बीच अनुबंि म ें जनर्िष्टज[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3799 केन्द्री सरकार औद्योजगक अजिकरण एव ं श्रम न् ा ाल , ृटना, ृचं ाट (ठरफरेन्स न.ं-14 (C) of 2019) को िजसा दक अनलु ग्नक म ें दि ा ा ग ा ि,ज प्रकाजित करती ि ज िो केन्द्री सरकार को सॉफ्ट कॉृी के सा 16.08.2024 को प्राप्त हुआ ा l [सं. एल-30012/34/2019-आईआर(एम)] दिलीृ कुमार, अवर सजचव New Delhi, the 4th September, 2024 S.O. 1698.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Reference No. 14 (C) of 2019) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Patna as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to M/s HPCL, Biofuels Ltd. and Shri Suraj Kumar which was received along with soft copy of the award by the Central Government on 04.09.2024. [No. L-30012/34/2019-IR(M)] DILIP KUMAR, Under Secy. ANNEXURE BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, PATNA. Reference Case No. :-14 (C) of 2019 Between the management of the Chief Executive Officer, M/S HPCL, Biofuels Ltd., NH-271, Road .- 3E, New Patliputra, Patna-800013 And Their workmen Sri Suraj Kumar, C/O- Rajnath Mishra, Post- Sugauli, P.S- Sugauli, Opp. Sugaili Railway Station, District- East Champaran (Bihar) – 845456. For the management:- Sri Alok Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For the workman:- Sri Chandra Shekhar Prasad, Advocate. Sri Rajesh Sahay, Advocate. Present:- Manoj Shankar Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patna. AWARD Patna, dt- 19th August, 2024. By the adjudication order no.- L-30012/34/2019-IR(M) New Delhi, dated- 25.07.2019 the Govt. of India Ministry of Labour New Delhi has referred under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, ( hereinafter to be referred to as “ the Act”) the following dispute between the management of the Chief Executive Officer, M/S HPCL, Biofuels Ltd., NH-271, Road .- 3E, New Patliputra, Patna- 800013 And Their workmen Sri Suraj Kumar, C/O- Rajnath Mishra, Post- Sugauli, P.S- Sugauli, Opp. Sugauli Railway Station, District- East Champaran (Bihar) – 845456 for adjudication to this tribunal. SCHEDULE “ Whether the demand vide letter dated 23.10.2018 of the workman Sri Suraj Kumar and others of HPCL, Biofuels Ltd. Sugauli for (a) Pay Revision & (b) Payment of allowance are proper, legal and justified? If yes, what relief they are entitled for? What directions, if any, are necessary in the matter?” 2. As per the statement of claim of the workmen, their case is that HPCL Biofuels Ltd. was incorporated in Oct. 2009 as a wholly owned subsidiaries of HPCL and set up integrated Sugar, Ethanol and Co-gen Power Plants by reviving two closed Sugar Mills namely Sugauli and Lauraya in the State of Bihar. Accordingly in the process of establishing its commercial production in the above locations, applications were invited for eligible candidates for their employment on different post vide employment news edition 21-27 Nov.,2009 and again vide employment news edition 21-27th August,2010. It is further asserted that in pursuance of both the advertisements these workmen applied for their required post as per their eligibility criterion, General Information and Instruction. It is further asserted that after scrutiny of the applications, they were called for written examination followed by interview as well and finally after medical test and police verification they were selected on their respective posts and all these workmen are given appointment letters and subsequently these workmen joined on their respective post on different dates as per appointment letters. It is further asserted that in both advertisements, the total post had been put in four salary slabs,3800 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] for the post of account clerk, store clerk, H.R clerk and purchase clerk the yearly salary was fixed 1.14 Lac to 1.25 Lacs. that shows initial they were required to be paid a sum of Rs. 9,500/- per month. Whereas for the post of Area cane supervisor, second class boiler, bagasse carrier attendant, attendant motor / tube well, boiling house fitter, electrician, wheel fitter, DCS operator, wear house step, instrument mechanic, Lab attendant, welder and peon, etc yearly salary as fixed @ Rs. 1.08 Lac to 1.25 Lacs. and accordingly they required to be paid salary of Rs. 9,000/- for the post of data processor / clerk the yearly salary was fixed @ Rs. 1.08 Lac to 1.15 Lacs. Accordinglyo this slab they were required to be paid a sum of Rs. 9,000/- P.M. For the post kamgar and weight bridge operator yearly salary was fixed 0.96 Lac to 1.08 Lacs. As per this slab they were required to be paid a sum of Rs. 8,000/- per month. It is further asserted that as per both the establishment there was a clause that the candidates appointed will be placed under probation of one year in their respective post / grade / pa scale but none of these workmen were paid as per their pay scale during the probation period. It is further asserted that in pursuance of clause 2 of appointment letter, salary was fixed much lesser than in pursuance of terms of those advertisements. For example as per advertisement, the salary of DCS operator @ Rs. 9,000/- per month, whereas in the appointment letter the starting basic salary was fixed Rs. 3500/- per month stating there in that the salary is under revision and the revised salary will be paid on confirmation of service. But even after confirmation of service of these workmen the basic salary was neither revised nor paid in pursuance in terms of advertisements. Hence these workman are entitled to get their basic salary as per the terms of advertisements from the date of joining till the probation period and thereafter they were entitled to get their salary with increment as per slab in the advertisements. It is further asserted that as per terms of the advertisements, these workmen were required to pay Industrial Dearness Allowance ( IDA ) and these workmen were also required to pay other applicable allowances and benefits admissible as per company rules enforced from time to time but none of these workmen were paid IDA applicable from time to time. It is further asserted that these workmen was paid in sum of amount of VDA. It is further asserted that these workmen were not permitted to see company rules which was applicable with respect to other allowances and benefits. It is further asserted that these workmen were paid house rent allowance (HRA), interim relief (IR) but only for few months. It is further asserted that neither any medical benefits is being provided to the workmen since their appointment nor and they were covered under the scheme of Employees Insurance Scheme ( ESI ). It is further asserted that on approach to the management by these workmen, they were asked during the probation period, the salary is under revision and on getting approval from the Head Office the basic salary with allowances and others benefits will be paid as per advertisements with arrear but nothing is complied by the management. It is further asserted that even after confirmation, neither the basic salary nor IDA and other allowances are being paid to these workmen as per the terms of advertisements. Even the benefits as mentioned as column no.- 7 of the advertisement was not paid any time as per company rules enforced from time to time. It is further asserted that even after several request, management company did not provide its company rules to these workmen. It is further asserted that these workmen from time to time agitated their issue before the management but their no grievances was redressed by the management. Ultimately these workmen vide letter dt- 23.10.2018 approached to ALC (C) Pakur where conciliation proceeding started on different dates. But management side did not give any reply / comments. Ultimately their dispute was referred by the appropriate Govt. to this tribunal. 3. On the other hand management side filed written statement stating therein, all the grievances as raised on behalf of the workmen and cause of action prayed therein is not maintainable and it is devoid of merits and not based on sound foundations / principles as the salary structure of all permanent non-management workers engaged in the company are governed by the policy decision of the Government which is an executive decision, enforced by the sugar wage board and all of them are being paid salary and wages as per the same since appointment without even slightest of deviations. It is further asserted that at the time of appointment all the details and intricacies related to salary structure were explained to the complainants ( workmen ) which have been endorsed b them to the company by acceptance letters and as such it can not been re-winded and back tracked as per one own sweet will, which the complainants has been done. It is further asserted that for the purpose of wage fixation in Sugar Industries, the wage board has grouped sugar production area into four regions, Bihar comes under North Zone along with Punjab, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Assam. It is further asserted that in the light of U.P Notification, a Tripartite Agreement comprising Employer’s and Employee’s representative and Bihar Government was made on 07.02.1990, 06.11.1990, 04.06.1991, 07.01.2006 and on 07.04.2010 that any notification by U.P Government relating to monetary benefits for Sugar Mills workers will be applicable exactly the same way for the workers in Sugar Industries in Bihar. Accordingly Sugar wage revision is implemented in Bihar. It is further asserted that these Government notifications are applicable all Vacuum Pan Sugar factories of the state and also applicable of all workmen of sugar factories who are covered under the definitions of “workmen” in the Industrial Dispute Act. It is further asserted that as per settlement between Tripartite Standing Committee ( Sugar ), periodical revision of Sugar wage is done and notified by the Labour Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar for compliance to all sugar factories in Bihar, hence after confirmation salaries of all Non management employees were revised in accordance with revised sugar wage scales and further all other inclusive of Variable Dearness Allowance (VDA) and fixed allowance (FA) being parts under sugar wage structure are also been paid to all complainants ( workmen ). Here complainants raised their issue against the company on false propositions i.e fit to be dismissed. It is further stated that company, after completion of the selection process gave appointment letters to all the successful candidates including the complainant in which all clauses and scope of the work were mentioned including the salary structure which was readily accepted and duly acknowledge by them in the second copy of the letters. It is further asserted that all the parameters associated with the profile were brought in[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3801 black and white by the company and the offer of the company were duly accepted by the complainants without any undue influence hence their contention the company has played fraud and forgery with them, is totally wrong and denied and so relief as prayed by the workmen should not be entertained. It is further asserted that in both the advertisement published in the November 2009 and in August 2010 the payment of CTC was wrongly mentioned due to inadvertent clerical mistake of the company and after realization as per the guidance of the sugar wage board it was corrected and thus the grievance of the petitioners on this front should be dismissed as the company is totally governed by the policy of the sugar board ( government ) and can’t deviate. It is further asserted that in the same advertisements Industrial Dearness Allowance( IDA ) was mentioned under clause-7 however all the employees were actually being paid VDA as per sugar wage direction right after their appointments. During beginning of the employment of 1st batch itself the mistake was identified and addressed immediately by the company management and the actual salary payment to the employees recruited through 1st and 2nd advertisement, commenced with VDA as per sugar wage board. It is further asserted that in the appointment letter as well as in confirmation letter, only “Dearness Allowance” is written as opposed to the contention of the claimants at paragraph-8 showing IDA has been mentioned in the appointment letter i.e also based on false and frivolous ground. It is further asserted that from the time of appointment, the salary of the complainants were being paid according to the Sugar Wage Board as mentioned in the appointment letters and the components payable after confirmation are being done in accordance with Sugar Wage Board and out of the payable salaries only 12% of the employees PF contribution are been deducted as per EPF Act. It is further asserted that HRA and medical allowances are not the components of the Sugar Wage Structure. It is further asserted that the claim of the workmen they are not covered under ESI Scheme is wrong as per section 1 (4) of the ESI Act, 1948 applies to all the factories others than season factory. Therefore, HPCL being a seasonal factory is exempted from the said Act. It is further asserted that in the notification of dt- 30.09.2016 clause – 4(C) dealt categorically with the VDA and the same will be calculated on the basis of All India Consumer price index number ( base year= 1960-100 ) and the VDA payable upto consumer price index number 4603 has been merged in the basic pay. It is further asserted that the calculation of VDA shall be made at the rate of Rs. 2.35 per point and the revision of VDA shall be made on quarterly basis on January 1st, April 1st, July 1st and October 1st every year and as per the instructions the same was being paid to the complainants. It has been further asserted that the claim of the complainants about non payment of medical facility also lacks substance as it has been dealt with clearly in clause 9 of the aforesaid notification. It is also asserted that company is duty bound to take care all its employees including the complainants and as a matter of fact they are being provided as medical rooms with necessary amenities and medicines hence the issue raised by the complainants have been take care of by the company in a most effective and efficient manner. It is further asserted that the averment of the complainants about non payment of bonus is wrong as all eligible employees the complainants have been paid bonus by the company for FY 2017-18 as per the provision of Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. It is further asserted that all the grievances and reliefs prayed for complainants have lucidly been taken care of by the company and have been dealt with comprehensive details in the written statement. Moreover, company have also given ample chance to the complainants following the principle of natural justice but they have raised grievances which should out rightly be rejected and dismissed as the reliefs prayed are not maintainable and it is devoid of merit. 4. In order to establish the claim of workmen, they examined altogether two witnesses namely Suraj Kumar (W.W-1) and Vivek Kumar ( W.W-2 ). Besides oral evidence workmen sides filed some documents in connection with their claim i.e marked as Ext.:- (i) Ext.-W/1 Advertisement for the selection of different post inHPCL Biofuels of employment news edition 21- 27.11.2009. (ii) Ext.-W/1-1 Advertisement for the post of HPCL Biofuels published employment news edition 21-27.08.2010. (iii) Ext.-W/2 Zerox copy of the appointment letters of all the 37 workmen shown from page- 15 to 151. (iv) Ext.- W/3 to W/3-19 Pay slip of all the 37 workmen showing from page 152 to 265. (v) Ext.-W/4 Complaint letter of dt- 23.10.2018 raised by the all the 37 workmen before the ALC (C) Pakur. (vi) Ext.-W/5 Photo copy of the notification issued from time to time with regards to the IDA by Central Government for public enterprises shown from page 269 to 372. (vii) Ext.-W/6 to W/6-36 Arrear chart as per claim of the 37 workmen shown from page 373 to 446. (viii) Ext.-W/7 Salary slip of Vivek Kumar of March 2011. (a) Ext.-W/7-1 Salary slip of Suraj Kumar March 2011. (b) Ext.-W/7-2 Salary sheet of Suraj Kumar Jan.2022. (c) Ext.- W/7-3 Salary sheet of Vivek Kumar Jan. 2022. (ix) Ext.-W/8 Representation petition for the IDA and per otherallowances given to the management by the 37 workmen.3802 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (x) W/8-1 Representation petition regarding IDA given by theworkmen to the Chief Executive Officer. (xi) Ext.-W/8-2 Representation petition for non payment of actual salary and other allowances as per the advertisement letter dt- 08.10.2018 given to Human Resources Department (HRD) HPCL Sugauli 5.On the other hand management side examined altogether three witnesses namely Sanjay Kumar (M.W-1), Ramesh Kumar Mishra (M.W-2) and Abhishek Kumar Singh (M.W-3). Besides oral evidence management side filed some documents and get it marked as Exts:- (i) Ext.- M/1 Annual financial report 2018-19, 2019-20 ( two page at page 7 & 8 ) (ii) Ext.-W/2 Flow chart of process follow of HPCL Biofuels shown of page 9 to 11. (iii) Ext.-M/3 Group Personnel Insurance of employees of HPCL Biofuels ( page 12 to 14 ) (iv) Ext.-M/4 Letter of dt- 20.04.2016 issued by CEO to Ministry of Petroleum of Natural Gas and its reply to the permanent employees of HPCL sent by CEO shown at page 15 & 16. (v) Ext.-M/5 HR policy of HPCL page 19 to 45. (vi) Ext.- M/6 Appointment letter of dt-31.12.2010 issued to Suraj Kumar, by Chief Executive Officer. (vii) Ext.-M/7 Order of the Hon’ble High Court Madras dt-28.02.2011 passed in W.P No.-45431 of 2006. 6. Now this tribunal securitizes the evidence of workmen Sri Suraj Kumar ( W.W-1 ) who is employee of HPCL Biofuels at Sugauli who supported all the averments as stated in statement of claim from the 37 workmen in examination-in-chief. He further stated that HPCL Biofuels Ltd was incorporated in October 2009 as wholly owned subsidiary company of HPCL and set up for integrated Sugar, Ethanol, Co Zen Power plant by reviving 2 closed Sugar Mills Sugauli and Lauriya in the State of Bihar. This witness further stated that he HPCL invited application of eligible candidates by publishing advertisement for different post twice in employment news edition 21-27.11.2009 and 21-27.08.2010 and proved the same as Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1repectively. This witness further stated that all the workmen applied on their require post as per eligible criterion general information and instruction of the advertisement. This witness further stated that after appearing in written examination followed by interview and medical test and police verification all the 37 workmen were selected on their respective post and they were given appointment letters by the workmen. This witness further stated that all the 37 workmen joined with objection on their respective post on different dates as per appointment letters proved as Ext.-W/2. This witness further stated about the salary slabsof different category as mentioned in the both the advertisement. This witness further stated that in both the advertisement there was a clause that the candidates appointed will be placed under probation for one year in their respective post / grade / pay scale but none of the workmen were paid as per their scale during the probation period rather the management mentioned in clause-2 of the appointment letter a lesser salary than in pursuance of terms of advertisement published in employment news. This witness further stated that even after confirmation of the service basic salary was not revised as per the terms of advertisement published in the employment news, however all the workmen are entitled to basic salary as per terms of the advertisement. This witness further stated that the management did not pay any IDA to the workmen as per terms of the advertisement rather some amount in the name of VDA has been paid to the workmen and company rules was never shown by the management to the aggrieved workmen. This witness further stated that workmen were paid HRA and IR ( interim relief ) only for few months but neither the medical benefits was provided nor they are covered under ESI. This witness further stated that when they raised their grievances before the management they have told by the management, salaries is under revision and on getting approval from the head office, all the basic salary and other allowances will be paid at the terms of advertisement. This witness further proved the salaries and other allowances sheet of all the category of the workmen from January 2011 to July 2019. This witness further proved the pay slips of all the category of 37 workmen from January 2011 to July 2019 i.e marked as Ext.-W/3 to W/3-19. This witness further stated that all the workmen from time to time agitated the matter before the management for their basic salary and other allowances not given as per given terms of advertisement but they were unheard ultimately they raised their grievances before the ALC (C) Pakur on 23.10.2018 and this witness proved the complaint of dt- 23.10.2018 filed before the ALC(C) Pakur as Ext.-W/4. This witness further stated that management side did not ready to redress the grievance of workmen as raised before the conciliation officer then our matter is referred to this tribunal. This witness further proved the photo copy of the notification issued from time to time with regard to IDA by the Central Government as Ext.-W/5. This witness further proved the accrued arrears of all the workmen on the basis of the terms of advertisement as Ext.-W/6 to W/6-36. This witness further stated that plea taken by the management side in its written statement is baseless and in correct as salary and wages as per Sugar Industries does not applicable to this Industries. This witness further stated that neither the Executive decision of the Government can be enforced by Sugar Wages Board nor any agreement comprising his employer and employee representative of Sugar Mills workers can be applicable to this industries. This witness further stated that the plea taken by the management in its written statement regarding wrong mentioning of CTC in advertisement is totally false and baseless. This witness further stated that the appointment letter given to the workmen are contrary to the terms of both the employment news moreover, HPCL Biofuels Ltd is not a seasonal[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3803 factory and so the plea taken by the management regarding application of rules and regulation salary structure and other benefits is totally incorrect and baseless. In cross-examination this witness categorically admits that in para-21 that he is doing work of DCS operator. He used to discharged the duties of eight hours shift wise. This witness also admits in para-12 that there is leave of 10 CL, 16 EL, and 12 SL ( Special leave ) appliable in the factory duty. This witness further admits that he is deposing on behalf of all the workmen whose issue are here in this case for adjudication. This witness categorically admits in para-23 of the cross-examination that he received the appointment letter from HPCL Biofuels Ltd i.e Subsidiary units of HPCL. This witness further admits that in para-29 of the cross-examination that he put his signature on the appointment letter after going through the terms and condition annexed with the appointment letter. This witness further stated in para-30 of the cross-examination he raised the issues of all the workmen regarding non payment of IDA, medical allowances, HRA and Misc. allowances as per advertisement. This witness further admits in para-31 of the cross-examination that basic salary VDA and FA are mentioned in the salary ship but he also claims regarding washing allowances, Mobile Allowances and travelling allowances. This witness further admits in para-35 of the cross-examination that whatever the salary slip issued by the company to the workmen they got increment after confirmation. In para-36 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that they raised their grievances before ALC (C) Pakur on 23.10.2018 for the first time before that they were always alarmed to the Board but they were always assured to redress the grievances but it was not done by then CEO Sexana Sahab. In para-39 of the cross- examination this witness admits that in the advertisement nothing is mentioned about HRA but salary slab was shown. In para-41 of the cross-examination this witness categorially stated that his Ext.-W/5 described about IDA notified by the Central Government for the time to time and all the workmen made claim of IDA on that basis. In para-42 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that the salary slips he filed of all the workmen does not disclose about HR. In para-43 this witness categorically stated that whatever the medical allowance should be given by the company i.e not being complied. This witness categorically admits in para-45 of the cross-examination HPCL Biofuels does not Govern under Sugar Board. In para-47 of the cross-examination this witness categorically admits when he joined HPCL Biofuels he was getting Rs. 6625/- salary after deduction and now he is receiving Rs. 18300/- per month. 7. W.W-2 Vivek Kumar is one of the workman whose dispute is under this reference also supported the grievances of 37 workmen as asserted in their statement of claim. He also fully corroborated about the details of the two advertisement by which all the 37 workmen after appearing in the written examination followed by interview, they were selected on their respective posts. This witness further stated that he was appointed on the post of Data Processer cum Clerk on 09.11.2010. This witness also supported the slab of salary of different posts that was advertised through two advertisement. This witness further supported that as per advertisement salary of DCS Operator was Rs. 9000/- P.M where as in the appointment letter the starting salary was fixed Rs. 3500/- P.M stating therein that the salary is under revision that will be paid on confirmation of service. This witness further stated that even after confirmation of service neither he nor other workmen got revised salary in terms of both advertisement published in employment news. So all the workmen are entitled to get basic salary as per salary slab given in advertisement. This witness thoroughly corroborated the whole version of Suraj Kumar W.W-1 in his examination-in- chief. This witness proved his salary slip of March-2011 and January-2022 i.e marked as Ext.-W/7 and W/7-3 respectively. This witness also proved the salary slip of Suraj Kumar of March-2011 and January-2022 as Ext.-W/7-1 and Ext.-W/7-2. This witness further proved the application regarding D.A submitted by all the 37 workmen to the management in year 2016, 2017 and 2018 i.e marked as Ext.- W/8, W/8-1, W/8-2 respectively. In cross-examination this witness admits in para-15 he is still posted on the post of Data Processor in HPCL Biofuels i.e sister concern of HPCL. In para-19 of the cross-examination, this witness categorically admits that HPCL manufacture ethanol, electric power generation, and sugar. Sugar is the main source for production of the ethanol. In para-22 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that his grievances is related to the salary, IDA, as per the advertisement published in employment news and in para-23 this witness categorically stated that whatever the salary slab was advertised in employment news payment of salary was not given by the management and besides this their grievances is also related with VDA, HRA and Medical allowance. In para-28 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that there is enhanced in the salary from the initial appointment but it is not enhanced to the actual proportion that ought to be given by the management to the workmen. This witness categorically admits in para-30 of the cross-examination that initially they received V.D.A, H.R.A and M.Abut it was stopped later on for which they raised grievance in the year 2015-16. This witness also stated that management always assured to redress their grievance but nothing is done then they raised the dispute before the Industrial Tribunal. In para-35 of the cross- examination this witness categorically stated that he does not know whether HPCL Biofuels come under the sugar board. 8. Now this tribunal securitizes the evidence of management side out of them M.W-1 Sanjay Kumar who is HR Officer at HBL Lauriya Unit. Who stated before this tribunal that the grievances of the workmen are salary paid to them at the time of joining less than the amount as stated in the advertisement,. V.D.A is being paid in place of I.D.A, Dearness allowance, H.R.A are not being paid, no Medical Allowance facility is given and workmen are not covered under the ESIC scheme. This witness further stated that Sugar factories Sugauli and Lauriya were taken over by the3804 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] HPCL in the year-2009 and for working of the two Sugar factories, a separate subsidiary company i.e HPCL Biofuels was incorporated by HPCL. This witness further stated that the HR of the HPCL framed the notice inviting applications from desirous candidates for the non-management work. This witness further stated that company has consistently cared for its workmen and always gave salaries and other perquisites as allowed by the Sugar Wage Board from time to time. This witness further stated that nearly 80-85% of the company’s jobs is the production of Sugar for which the workmen are also engaged and hardly 15-20% of the output goes into the production of Ethanol. This witness further stated that production of sugar is seasonal in nature which merely goes for only 2-3 months but company is paying its workmen salary for the entire year. This witness further stated that as per notification of Sugar Wage Board salary is being paid and as per section 1(4) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 all the seasonal factories are exempted. This witness further stated that company is giving proper salary and VDA and fixed allowances as per notification of Sugar Wage Board. This witness further stated that the grievances of workmen they have never been shared about the HR policy of the company is quite wrong because i.e available on the website. This witness further stated that company has also consistently revising the salary of all its workmen and they are all drawing a decent salary.Since all the workmen are the native of same area they have own house and accommodation so they do not require any HRA. This witness further stated the grievances of the workmen are false and frivolous. This witness further proved the financial position of HPCL Biofuels of the year 2019-20 signed by the Director i.e marked as Ext.- M/1. This witness also proved the process flow chart of HPCL Biofuels i.eis in three pages marked as Ext.-M/2. This witness further proved the group personnel insurance of the employees taken from the Oriental Insurance Company i.eis three pages marked as Ext.- M/3. This witness proved the letter of dt- 20.04.2016 issued by company to the Secretary of Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, regarding grievances of I.D.A i.e marked as Ext.-M/4. This witness further proved the HR policy of the HPCL Biofuels i.e 27 in pages marked as Ext.-M/5. This witness further stated that company is giving VDA its employee instead of I.D.A. In cross-examination this witness categorically stated that in para-18 that there are two types of the employees in his company one management employees and another non-management employees. Seasonal employees are also covered under non-management employees. In para-19 this witness categorically stated that the selection process of non-management employees or seasonal employees is same but at the same breath in para-21 this witness stated he does not know the selection mode of the seasonal employees. This witness categorically denied that the documents Ext.-M/3 is forged but he admits that there is no seal of management and Oriental Insurance Company on the document because it is computer generated documents. In para-31 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that HPCL Biofuels Ltd is the subsidiary company of HPCL but HPCL is not the controlling company of the employees HPCL Biofuels. In para- 34 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that there is no control of HPCL on the management employees non-management employees and seasonal employees of HBL. This witness categorically stated in para-35 of the cross-examination he has no knowledge about written statement of the company filed here and in para-39 this witness adjusts that workmen whose grievances is under this reference are employees of HPCL Biofuels. 9. M.W-2 Ramesh Kumar Mishra is the manager HR head quarter of the HPCL Biofuels Ltd also tried to support the version of M.W-1 in examination-in-chief and also proved the documents already got Extd. by the M.W-1 in his evidence. In cross-examination this witness admitted in para-16 that HPCL Biofuels is the registered company but he can’t say whether in copy of registration is submitted before this tribunal or not. In para-23 this witness categorically admits that HPCL Generated Power for its factory only. In para-24 of the cross-examination this witness stated that Ethanol and production of electricity is based on the Bio product of the Sugar cane. In para-29 of the cross- examination this witness admits that the documents of insurance company ( Ext.-M/3) is not authenticated by the management and in para- 30 this witness admits that no paper submitted from the management for the period of grievances as raised by the workmen. 10. M.W-3 Abhishek Kumar is Senior Project Engineer of HPCL Biofuels at Sagauli who also tried to support the version in his examination-in-chief what is already stated by M.W-1 and M.W-2 in their evidence. There is no difference at all in the evidence of all the three witnesses. This witness further stated that HBL has incurred a loss of around Rs. 783 croresin the last 10 years. This witness also stated that as per the letter of appointment it is mentioned D.A and other allowances but no I.D.A is mentioned in the appointment letter and the company is providing all types of allowances as fixed and revised by Sugar Wage Board from time to time. This witness further stated that HPCL is involved in the sugar cane for the production of sugar and the production of finished goods throughbiproducts. This witness also stated that the grievances of the workmen are false and frivolous. This witness categorically stated in para-9 that appointment letter of Suraj Kumar is issued on 31.12.2010 signed by B. Rajesh CEO ( Chief Executive Officer ) and proved the same as Ext.-M/6. This witness also proved the judgement of the Hon’ble Madras High Court dt- 28.02.2011 passed in W.P No.- 45431 of 2006 as marked Ext.-M/7. This witness admits in para-12 of the cross-examination HPCL Biofuels is the subsidiary company of HPCL and it is fully owned subsidiary company. In para-25 of the cross-examination this witness stated that Ext.-M/6 the appointment of letter of Suraj Kumar denotes salary description and it is based on the advertisement notification. In para-26 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that Ext.- W/1-1 the appointment letter issued on[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3805 the basis of advertisement where the salary of DCS operator is shown as 1.08 to 1.25 Lac i.e under cost of company CTC ( Cost to Company ). In para-28 of the cross-examination this witness categorically stated that he can’t say as per Ext.-W/1-1 workmen did not get payment. In para- 31 this witness admits that employee gets salary of 12 months on their respective post whether factory is operational or not. In para-33 this witness admits that HPCL is not registered under sugar industry. 11. It is argued on behalf of the workmen that this reference is related to the demand letter dt- 23.10.2018 of the 37 workmen of HPCL Biofuels, Sugauli and Lauriya regarding their pay revision and payment of allowances. It is further argued that it is evident from Ext.-W/1 and Ext.-W/1-1 HPCL after acquisition of two sugar factory Sugauli and Lauriya for the production of Ethanol and power plant through its subsidiary company incorporated as HPC Biofuels Ltd, and they invited application for employment for different posts vide employment news 2009 and 2010. It is further argued that all the 37 workmen also participated in the examination of different posts and after taking selection in written examination followed by interview they were verified through medical test and finally they were declared successful and company issued appointment letters to these workmen for their respective post. Ext.-W/2 series is the appointment letters issued to the workmen but on the plain reading of the appointment letter the terms and condition of their employment differs as mentioned in the advertisement. At that time all the workmen protested on receiving the appointment letter then management assured them the present salary is under revision they will be paid after the confirmation of service but even after confirmation their salary is not revised as per terms of advertisement then the workmen reported their demand to the CEO in Novemebr-2014 & June-2016. It is further argued that when management did not take any positive step on the grievances of the workmen, workmen preferred CWJC No.- 2930 of 2017 but it was withdrawn with liberty to exhaust their departmental remedies then the workmen raised their dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) Patna on 23.10.2018 but management side did not arrivedfor any settlement then the appropriate Govt. referred the dispute of all the workmen to this tribunal. It is further argued that management side raised this issue at the time of advertisement there was no relationship of these workmen with the management but this contention of the management is not at all applicable because when once applications are invited through advertisement on different post the participants of that selection process is connected with the management on getting finally selected. It is further argued that Ext.-W/4 the demand letter dt-23.10.2018 that shows that inspite selection followed by the assurance given by the management, the workmen was not being paid in accordance with terms of advertisement then grievance was raised by the workmen before appropriate authority but they were unheard by the officersof the management on different dates. It is further argued by the learned counsel of the workmen that the contention of the management side, once the appointment letter is accepted by the workmen they can’t raise dispute regarding revised salary and of other allowances but the facts is, right from receiving the appointment letter, all the workmen protested regarding their wages and allowances that was not as per terms of advertisement. At that time management assured the workmen this is under revision and they will receive revised wages and allowances on confirmation of service that is also written in the appointment letters ( Ext.-W/2 series ). It is further argued that the witness M.W-1 categorically admitted in his evidence HPCL Biofuels Ltd is subsidiary company of HPCL. M.W-3 also admits the workmen have been appointed on their respective post are being paid accordingly for all 12 months whether factory is operational or not. This witness also admits that HPCL Biofuels Ltd is not registered under sugar industry. It is further argued that both the witnesses of the workmen side thoroughly establish their claim regarding revised pay and allowances not being given by the management company as per terms of advertisement and there is nothing in their cross-examination that could discard their evidence regarding the dispute as raised. It is further argued that management side failed to disclose why the workmen was not given salary and allowances as per terms of agreement. Thus workmen side thoroughly establish their claim through oral and documentary evidence and they are entitled for the salary and allowances as per terms of advertisement right from confirmation of service. 12. On the other hand it is argued from the management side the reference case can only be adjudicated with respect to 30 workers who have signed the demand letter dt-23.10.2018 i.e Ext.-W/4. However, workmen side filed the statement of claim on behalf of 37 workers that can’t be permitted. It is further argued that Sugauli Unit of Biofuels Ltd was not established and under commercial production as on dates of two advertisements 21-27 Novemeber,2009 and 21-27 August, 2010 ie. Ext.- W/1 & W/1-1. At that time industry was not in existence the two advertisement clearly stated that Sagauli Unit was in the process ofbeing established and the plant was expected to commence production in November,2010. It is well settled law that if the “industry”is not in the existence then no ‘industrial dispute’ can be arise. It is further argued that at the time off two advertisement there was no employer -employee relationship with the management and workmen so dispute arising out on the basis of two advertisement can not be said as an industrial dispute. It is further argued that appointment letters i.e Ext.-W/2 is the contract of employment with the workmen. It is further argued that the dispute referred for adjudication arises of two advertisement and the alleged right based on the two advertisements are being sought to be enforced which can not be done under provision of Industrial Dispute because on the dates when these two advertisements were published, there did not exist any ‘contract’ of employment’ with the workmen. So the claim of the workmen does not arise on the basis of two advertisements. It is further argued that when the workmen accepted the appointment letters where terms and conditions of their employment is clearly mentioned and subsequently raising dispute of pay revision and allowances can’t be entertained. It is further argued that as per the appointment letter the workmen are getting salary and allowances as per their contract of employment, moreover, they never protested or raise any objection or refused the3806 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] appointment letter stating, they are not been paid as per advertisement. So they should be stopped from making such claim. It is further argued that the claim of the workman is stale claim because they have joined their services between October 2010 to January-2011 ( Exts.- W/2 series ) and since then they are regularly receiving their salary and allowances as per their agreed contract of the employment and now after eight years they have raised their dispute vide demand letter dt- 23.10.2018 can’t be qualify as an Industrial Dispute. It is further argued that only two workmen turned up for evidence so why the other workmen did not come for evidence reasons based known to them.Not turning up for evidence by other workmen take advantage on the basis of evidence given by two workmen. It is further argued that no worker came forward to disclose the exact amounts of their claim rather the two witness gave their evidence without any basis because no calculation has been shown. It is further argued that the workmen have wrongly interpreted concept of CTC ( Cost to Company ) contained in the advertisement. The concept of CTC is terms for total salary package of an employment it indicates the total amount of expenses a company spends on an employee during one year. Workmen side wrongly interpreted to mean “basic salary”. It is further argued that in place of I.D.A workers are being paid VDA which has been admitted by the W.W-1 & W.W-2 in their evidence. So claim of the I.D.A by the workmen is baseless. It is further argued that in the two advertisement, it was clearly mentioned that other applicable allowances and benefits will be admissible as per company rules framed from time to time. It is further argued that both the workmen W.W-1 & W.W-2 stated they have not been paid medical allowance, fixed allowances or other any allowances but the facts is these kinds of allowances were never proposed to be paid in the two advertisement. It is further argued that both the workman witness admitted in their evidence their salary has been increased after confirmation, so the claim of not getting the revised pay is not correct because workmen side failed to place any authentic evidence as how much salary should have been increased and management has not increasedthe same. So the claim of the workmen are baseless and so it should be rejected. 13. In order to suffice the contention of the argument the management representative relied some rulings in connection with his argument “ if there is no existence of industry no Industrial dispute can be raised.” As it is reported in AIR 1970 (80) (1407 ) to apply the notification, the condition precedentfor the existence of an industry has to be satisfy. As in the instant case at the time of advertisement there was no existence of the industry of HPCL Biofuels. The management relied on the ruling in 2006 ( 3 CLR 298 ) in connection with,“when the workmen accepted the appointment letter by putting their signature that is indicative they have waived the benefits given in the two advertisements so they should be estopped of making claim on the basis of two advertisements.” In connection with stale claim the management side relied on the ruling 2011 (2) PLJR 145,By this ruling management tried to establish the matter of the workmen was of the year 2010, 2011 but they raised dispute for the first time before the appropriate authority in year 2018. So their claim is delayed by seven years without any proper justification. 14. This tribunal finds that workmen side has filed accrued arrears chart of all the 37 workmen on the basis of salary slabs details in the two advertisement on which basis they have been appointed after selection i.e ( Ex.-W/6 Series). So before discussing regarding their grievances of basic salary, VDA, HRA, MA, and other allowances as per their letter of demand ( Ext.-W/4 ) and on the basis of the pay slips of the 37 workmen of different categories as filed shown in Ex.-W/3 Series, it is necessitated to draw a chart showing the list of workmen as per their arrears claim Ex.- W/6 Series that is as under :- Sl. No. Name of Post Basic Page as Salary Proposed Pages the workmen Salary as per Slip of Accrued As per per Statement Workmen Arrears Arrear appoint- of Claim With Exts. of salary & Chart -ment of ( Exts.- Allowances Of Exts. letter Workmen W/3 As per salary -W/6 With Series ) Slab of All Series. Annexures. 37 Workmen ( Ext.-W/6 Series ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. Vikash Kr. Area Rs. 3800/- 18 to 21 Rs.12287/- Ext.-W/6-2 377to378 Cane Ext.-W/3-1 Supervisor. P-158 to 163.[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3807 2. Keshav Kr. ” ” Rs. 3800/- 30 to 33 ---------- Ext.-W/6-1 375to376 3. Vijay Kumar ” ” Rs. 3800/- 88 to 90 ---------- Ext.-W/6-25 423 to 424 Mihra 4. Mirinal Kr. ” ” Rs. 3800/- 95 to 94 ---------- Ext.-W/6-23 419 to 420 Srivastava 5. Imran Khan ” ” Rs. 3800/- 95 to 98 ---------- Ext.-W/6-24 421 to 424 6. Ritesh Kr. Kamdar Rs. 3500/- 60 to 63 ---------- Ext.-W/6-22 417 to 418 Jha Sl. No. Name of Post Basic Page as Salary Proposed Pages the workmen Salary as per Slip of Accrued As per per Statement Workmen Arrears Arrear appoint- of Claim With Exts. of salary & Chart -ment of ( Exts.- Allowances Of Exts. letter Workmen W/3 As per salary -W/6 With Series ) Slab of All Series. Annexures. 37 Workmen ( Ext.-W/6 Series ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7. Saket Pandy ” ” Rs. 3500/- 80 to 83 ---------- Ext.-W/6-20 413 to 414 8. Rakesh Kr. ” ” Rs. 3500/- 103 to 106 ---------- Ext.-W/6-21 415 to 416 Yadaw 9. Kamleshwar ” ” Rs. 3500/- 133 to 136 ---------- Ext.-W/6-18 409 to 410 Pd. Srivastava 10. Bindabon ” ” Rs. 3500/- 137 to 139 ---------- Ext.-W/6-19 411 to 412 Pramanick 11. Sujit Kumar Lab. Rs. 3500/- 140 to 143 ---------- Ext.-W/6-32 437 to 438 Singh Attendant -/Peon/ Kamdar 12. Dhiraj Kr. ” ” Rs. 3500/- 144 to 147 ---------- Ext.-W/6-31 435 to 436 13. Naresh Kr. ” ” Rs. 3500/- 148 to 151 ---------- Ext.-W/6-29 431 to 432 14. Suraj Kr. DCS Rs. 3500/- 15 to 17 Rs.11990/- Ext.-W/6-6 378 to 379 Operator Ext.-W/3 Page-152 to 157 Ext.-W/7 to Ext.-W/7-23808 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] P-447 to 449 15. Vijayendra ” ” Rs. 3500/- 40 to 43 Rs.11870=00 Ext.-W/6-33 439 to 440 Pratap Ext.-W/3-5 Narain Singh P-180 to 186 16. Upendra Kr. ” ” Rs. 3500/- 57 to 59 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-35 443 to 444 Ext.-W/3-10 P-208 to 210 17. Shiv Pd. Fitter Rs. 3650/- 44 to 46 Rs.12228=00 Ext.-W/6-12 397 to 398 Pandey Ext.-W/3-6 P-187 to 192 18. Chandan ” ” Rs. 3650/- 84 to 87 Rs.12228=00 Ext.-W/6-11 395 to 396 Kishore Ext.-W/3-15 Baitha P-236 to 241 19. Santosh Kr. ” ” ---------- ---------- ---------- Ext.-W/6-13 399 to 400 Pd. Srivastava 20. Dipu Kr. Attendant Rs.3500/- 64 to 66 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-30 433 to 434 Srivastava (Motor/Tube Ext.-W/3-11 Well P-211 to 217 Attendant 21. Sunil Kr. ” ” Rs.3500/- 107 to 110 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-27 427 to 423 Ext.-W/3-16 P-242 to 247 22. Niraj Tiwary Welders Rs.3650/- 51 to 53 Rs.12228=00 Ext.-W/6-10 393 to 394 Ext.-W/3-8 P-199 to 204 23. Sonu Kr. ” ” Rs.3650/- 129 to 132 ---------- Ext.-W/6-19 391 to 392 Paswan 24. Ashok Kr. Electrician Rs.3800/- 68 to 71 Rs.12411=00 Ext.-W/6-15 403 to 404 Paswan Ext.-W/3-12 P-218 to 223 25. Ramprit ” ” Rs.3800/- 76 to 79 Rs.12411=00 Ext.-W/6-14 401 to 402 Prajapati Ext.-W/3-14 P-218 to 223 26. Rajesh Bagasse Rs.3500/- 72 to 75 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-3 379 to 380 Baitha Carrier Ext.-W/3-163 Attendant/- P-242 to 247 -(Feed Pump Attendant) 27. Neeraj ” ” Rs.3500/- 99 to 102 ---------- Ext.-W/6-34 441 to 442[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3809 Kr.Roy 28. Niraj Kr. Weight Rs.3500/- 111 to 113 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-36 445 to 446 Bridge Ext.-W/3-19 Operator P-242 to 247 29. Navin Kr. Finance Rs. 3650/- 22 to 25 Rs.12228=00 Ext.-W/6-8 389 to 390 Mishra Clerk Ext.-W/3-2 P-164 to 167 30. Chandan Kr HR/- Rs. 3650/- 26 to 29 ---------- Ext.-W/6-26 385 to 386 -General Clerk 31. Satendra Pd Purchase Rs. 3650/- 43 to 36 Rs.12228=00 Ext.-W/6-5 383 to 384 Kushwaha Clerk Ext.-W/3-3 P-168 to 173 32. Ramesh Kr. WH/Clerk Rs. 3650/- 37 to 39 Rs.12228=00 Ext.-W/6-7 387 to 388 Singh (Store- Ext.-W/3-4 -Clerk ) P-174 to 179 33. Jinny Issac 2nd Class Rs. 3500/- 47 to 50 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-4 381 to 382 Bioler Ext.-W/3-7 Attendant- P-193 to 198 Cum- Firman Sharan Ware Rs. 3500/- 54 to 56 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-26 425 to 426 Piyush House Ext.-W/3-79 34. Staff/- P-205 to 207 Helper Pankaj Kr. Weight Rs. 3500/- 118 to 121 Rs.11990=00 Ext.-W/6-29 429 to 430 35. Keshri Bridge Ext.-W/3-18 Operator P-254 to 259 Amit Kr. Instrumenta- Rs. 3800/- 122 to 124 Rs.12411=00 Ext.-W/6-16 405 to 406 36. Tiwari -tion Ext.-W/3-17 Mechnic P-248 to 253 Vivek Kr. Date Rs.12622=00 Ext.-W/6-17 407 to 409 37. Processor- Ext.-W/7-3 P-450 15. Considering the facts and materials available on the record as discussed above and submissions as advanced on behalf of both the sides, this tribunal finds that this claim was raised by Suraj Kumar and 36 workmen of HPCL Biofuels Ltd, Sugauli vide their demand letter dt- 23.10.2018 ( Ext.-W/4 ) for not getting the salary and allowances as per advertisement published in the employment news edition 21-27.11.2009 and 2nd time 21-27.08.2010 (Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1) the basis of their core issue is demand letter of dt- 23.10.2018 ( Ext.-W/4 ) by which all 37 workmen raised their dispute before the ALC (C) Pakur. The demand letter dt-23.10.2018 (Ext.-W/4 ) shows the aggrieved workmen brought attention of ALC (C) Pakur they have appeared in the written examination on different posts as per advertisement published in employment news in the year 2009, 2010 wherein the salary slabs of different post was also shown in the two advertisements and they were given appointment letters with the endorsement salary under revision and they will get it on confirmation but after confirmation all the workmen did neither received salary as per the advertisement nor they have been provided any kind of allowances. They also raised issue even after working of eight years in the management company, workmen neither got any promotion nor any bonus however, they used to make communication with the management by making complaint but nothing is done by the management. On this issue, the management sides argued that the demand letter of dt- 23.10.2018 does not disclose the real issue as the workmen side raised in their statement of claim but on close scrutiny of the demand notice of dt- 23.10.2018 (Ext.-W/4), it is evident that the workmen has raised their grievances for not getting the salary as per advertisements of 2009 and 2010 ( Ext.W/1 & W/1-1 ) rather they have given appointment letters showing lesser salary with note3810 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] salary is under revision and they will be given after confirmation. So this tribunal does not find any force in the contention of the management nothing is clear from the demand notice of dt-23.10.2018 ( Ext.-W/4 ). This tribunal finds that out of 37 workmen two workmen Suraj Kumar (W.W-1 )& Vivek Kumar ( W.W-2 ) have fully supported the claim of all workmen in their evidence about not getting the actual salary as per advertisement rather they have been given lesser salary mentioned in the appointment letter ( Ext.-W/2 series ). Both the workmen also supported his fact thatthe appointment letters of all the 37 workmen i.e( Ext.-W/2 series ) indicates regarding salary i.e lesser to the salary slab given in the advertisement with note salary is under revision and revised salary will paid on confirmation of service. Both the workmen also supported this fact that even after confirmation their salary is not revised as per advertisement and they also did not get IDA and other allowances as per the advertisement. The advertisement Ext.- W/1 that was published in the edition 21-27.11.2009 of employment news in which HPCL Biofuels is shown as wholly owned subsidiary company of HPCL advertised for the six posts including data processor cum clerk in which salary slab of data processor was 1.08 to 1.15 Lac. per year inclusive all. It is also shown in the advertisement ( Ext.- W/1 ) besides basic pay candidates will also be paid IDA @ applicable rates and other allowances and benefits will be admissible as per company rules in force from time to time. Advertisement of edition 21-27.08.2010 of employment news advertised for the 46 posts shown the salary slab of different post and it is also mentioned in the said advertisement besides basic pay candidates will also be paid IDA at the applicable rate. Other applicable allowances and benefits will be admissible as per company rules in force from time to time. W.W-1 Suraj Kumar appointed DCS Operator whose basic salary was fixed Rs. 3500/- per months as per salary slip and appointment letter. The salary slip of Suraj Kumar of March-2011 produced by workmen side ( Ext.-W/7-1 ) shows that Suraj Kumar DCS operator got basic salary Rs. 3500/- VDA Rs. 2930/-. But in the second column of the pay slip shows that head earning in which Basic amount Rs. 3387.10, V.D.A- Rs. 2835.48Ps., F.A- 171.29Ps., Interim Relief- Rs. 338.71Ps., Medical Allowance- Rs. 87.10Ps., H.R.A- Rs. 338.71Ps, total amount of Rs. 7158.30Ps, and pay slip also shows deductions of Rs. 747.00Ps thus Suraj Kumar received net salary Rs. 6411.30Ps this pay slip shows that in the March-2011 Suraj Kumar ( W.W-1 ) was receiving fixed allowance interim M.A & H.R.A but later on only basic V.D.A & F.A was being paid by the company to the workman Suraj Kumar (W.W-1) that is evident from his pay slip for the months of January-2022 showing Basic Rs. 12622.00, V.D.A- Rs. 8168.35, and in second column under of earning basic Rs. 10993.35, V.D.A- Rs. 7114.37, and F.A- Rs. 47.90, and after deduction of P.F- Rs.2173.00 net salary was given to Suraj Kumar Rs. 15,982.62. The issue raised by the workmen side after few month’s of their appointment, they were not getting M.A & H.R.A is established by salary slip of January-2022 filed by the Suraj Kumar ( Ext.- W/7-2 ). As per the pay slip of March-2011 of workman Suraj Kumar ( Ext.-W/7-1) he was getting 83.71% of the basic salary as V.D.A however, as per pay slip of January-2022 (Ext.-W/7-2 ) Suraj Kumar was getting V.D.A 64.71% of the basic it shows that D.A is slashed, however V.D.A relates to the price index, why % of V.D.A to the basic went down, it is not reported by the management i.e a matter of great concern and it is related to the demand notice given by the workmen side. Witness Vivek Kumar W.W-2 also filed his two pay slips one of March-2011 ( Ext.-W/7 ) and second pay slip of January-2022 ( Ext.- W/7-3). Pay slip of March-2011 shows that Vivek Kumar was getting basic Rs. 3650.00 and V.D.A- Rs. 2930.00, but in the second column of pay slip under earning head his basic shown Rs. 3650.00, and V.D.A- Rs. 2930.00, F.A- Rs. 55.00, interim relief- Rs.350.00, M.A- Rs. 40.00, H.R.A- Rs.365.00.As per pay slip Vivek Kumar ( W.W-2 ) was getting V.D.A- 80.27% to his basic and 10% H.R.A to his basic but he received M.A only Rs. 40.00, however, Suraj Kumar whose basic was lesser than Vivek Kumar but he received M.A Rs. 87.10Ps. this anomaly in fixing M.A does not look sound and concrete, why the lesser basic paid worker was given more medical allowanceto the higher basic paid worker these discrepancy in paying different M.A to different grade workers is also not reported by the managementto this tribunal. This also supported the grievance raised by the workmen regarding medical and other allowance and V.D.A. Workman Vivek Kumar has applied for the post of Data Processor cum Clerk as per the advertisement published in the edition 27.11.2009 of employment news as per advertisement salary slab was shown 1.08 to 1.15 Lacs per annum, like wise Suraj Kumar W.W-1 who applied for the post of DCS operator as per advertisement of 21-27.08.2010 in employment news and as per advertisement the salary slab of DCS operator is 1.08 to 1.25 P.A meaning their by Suraj Kumar ( W.W-1 ) must be receiving salary not less then Rs. 9,000/- P.M in the year-2011 but he was given Rs. 7158.30Ps. and after deduction of P.F Rs. 747.00 he received Rs. 6611.00 and this amount is exclusive of V.D.A, F.A, interim relief, M.A, and H.R.A i.e the clear cut discrepancy in the salary slip given by the management against the salary slab shown in the advertisement besides its I.D.A and other allowance should be pay as per rules from time to time is also mentioned in the two advertisement Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1. Suraj Kumar ( W.W-1 ) has proved the appointment letters of all the 37 workmen including him as Ext.-W/2 series of perusal of the appointment letters of all the 37 workmen.It appears that workman, Suraj Kumar, Vijendra Pratap Narayan Singh and one Mr. Kumar were appointed on the post of DCS operator they applied for the said post on the basis of advertisement published in the employment news edition 21-27.08.2010 ( Ext.-W/1-1 ). As per advertisement their salary slab is from 1.08 to 1.25 Lacs P.A it shows their basic salary should be Rs. 9,000/- P.M at the time of appointment, moreover, as per advertisement in serial no.-7 shows besides basic pay candidates also be paid I.D.A at the applicable rates and other allowances and benefits will be admissible as per company rules from time to time.This tribunal further finds that workman Vikash Kumar, Keshav Kumar, Vijay Kumar Mishra, Mirinal Kumar Srivastava, Imran Khan are appointed to the post of Area Cane Supervisor their basic pay Rs. 3800/- P.M is shown in their respective appointment letters ( Ext.-W/2 Series ) however as per advertisement details salary slab is 1.08 to 1.25 Lacs P.A meaning there by initial basic should be Rs. 9000/- P.M besides I.D.A and other allowances[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3811 like H.R.A, M.A. Out of them Vikash Kumar filed his pay slips i.e( Ext.-W/3-1) of July, October, December of year- 2018 in which only basic and VDA, Mob. Allowance and Bike Allowance are shown. He also filed pay slips of the month of January, April and July of 2019 where basic pay is shown as Rs. 12411/- and VDA Rs. 5649/- but he was not given the actual VDA as per notification regarding D.A filed by the workmen side is ( Ext.-W/5 ).As per office memorandum regarding payment of D.A to the employee is,whose basic pay above Rs. 9500/- he should get minimum Rs. 28,234/- from 01.01.2018 i.e not paid to the workmen Vikash Kumar and others who are appointed on the same post as Area Cane Supervisor. This tribunal further finds that workmen Ritesh Kumar Jha, Saket Pandey, Rakesh Kumar Yadav, Kamleshwar Prasad and Brindabon Pramanick have been appointed to the post of Kamdar after getting selection in the examination from the said advertisement ( Ext.-W/1-1 ). Their appointment letter (Ext.-W/2 series) shows that they have been given basic Rs. 3500/- at the time of joining however as per advertisement, basic pay should be given Rs. 8000/- P.M as per salary slab given in advertisement (Ext.-W/1-1).Their appointment letter also show with endorsement pay under revision salary will be enhanced after confirmation. This tribunal further finds that workmen namely Ashok Kumar Pawan Paswan, Ramprit Prajapati have been appointed to the post of electrician against the advertisement published in the employment news 21-27.10.2010 ( Ext.-W/1-1 ) their basic salary is shown as Rs. 3800/- has shown appointment letter ( Ext.-W/2 series ) in which salary slab is shown 1.08 to 1.25 Lacs P.A meaning there by salary should be Rs. 9000/- P.M at time of joining but even after endorsement in appointment letters“pay under revision revised salary will be paid on confirmation of service” but it is not followed by the company i.e main demand of the workmen in their demand notice ( Ext.-W/4 ). Workman Ashok Kumar Paswan has filed his pay slip of the month of March, April, May, June July, August of 2019 ( Ext.-W/3-12 ) in which his basic salary is Rs. 12,411/-, VDA- Rs.5219/-.Pay slip shows that basic is enhanced to the initially given Rs. 3800/- at the time of issuing appointment letter but other allowances like HRA, M.A is not given to the workmen.Moreover as per the office memorandum regarding D.A ( IDA ) filed by the workmen ( Ext.-W/5 series ) in which office memorandum of dt- 03.01.2019 shows that whose basic is above Rs. 9500/- should be given minimum D.A Rs. 30,011/- from 01.01.2019 but this is not paid to the workmen who is appointed to the post of electrician. This tribunal further finds that workman Sujit Kumar Singh, Dhanraj Kumar and Naresh Kumar are appointed to the post of Lab. Attendant / Peon against the advertisement published in the edition of 21-27.10.2010 of the employment news ( Ext.- W/1-1 ), their appointment letters show that they have been given initial basic Rs. 3500/- P.M with a endorsement basic pay is under revision, revised pay shall be given on confirmation but even after confirmation they did not get basic and D.A according to the advertisement that should be Rs. 9000/- P.M basic upon confirmation of the service besides this Lab. Attendant / Peon should be given HRA and M.A and D.A ( IDA ) as per the enhancement of D.A shown in the office memorandum filed by the workman as ( Ext.- W/5 ). This tribunal further finds that workman namely Niraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar Keshri have been appointed to the post of Weight Bridge Operator against the advertisement ( Ext.-W/1-1 ).Their appointment letter show that they have given basic Rs. 3500/- P.M with endorsement pay under revision, revised salary shall be given on confirmation. As per advertisement their salary slab is 0.96 to 1.08 Lacs P.A meaning there by workman to the post of Weight Bridge Operator should be given Rs. 8000/- P.M basic upon confirmation besides basic, D.A ( IDA ) other allowance like HRA and M.A but they did not get D.A and other allowances. Workman Niraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar Keshri have filed their pay slip too. Pay slip for the month of August-2019 filed by Pankaj Kumar Keshri ( Ext.-W/3-18 ) shows he received basic Rs. 11990/-, VDA Rs.- 5649.50 and F.A 177.00. As per pay slip basic salary has been enhanced to the initial posting that was Rs. 3500/- but VDA is not given as per office memorandum filed by the workmen side (Ext.-W/5 ) that is issued on 19.01.2019 as per that office memorandum the employee whose basic pay is above the Rs. 9500/- should be given minimum D.A Rs. 30,011/- the same figure is shown in the pay slip of Niraj Kumar that is Ext.- W/3-19. This tribunal further finds that workman namely Niraj Kumar and Sonu Kumar Paswan have been appointed on the post of Welders who have been given basic Rs. 3650 P.M as per their appointmentletters ( Ext.-W/2 series ) but as per the advertisement ( Ext.- W/1-1) their salary slab is 1.08 to 1.25 Lacs P.A meaning there by they should get Rs. 9000/- P.M basic upon confirmation besides basic workman to the post of Welders should also get VDA ( IDA ), HRA and M.A and F.A that was initially given by the company to the workmen but these workmen also did not get D.A according to the enhanced basic i.e shown in the office memorandum documents filed by the workman as ( Ext.-W/5 ). Niraj Tiwary have filed his pay slip of the month of March, April, May, June, July, August of the year-2019 as ( Ext.-W/3-8 ) pay slip of August-2019 shows he received, basic Rs. 12,228/- VDA Rs. 6549 and F.A Rs. 42.58, salary slip also shows his basic salary has been enhanced from the initial posting but the VDA i.e ( IDA ) is not given according to the office memorandum issue by the Govt. of India, Department of Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, Department of Public Enterprises from time to time i.e ( Ext.-W/5 ). This is the discrepancy in the salary of the workmen as of the details above. This tribunal further finds that workmen namely Navin Kumar Mishra, Satyendra Pd. Kushwaha, Ramesh Kumar Singh and Chandan Kumar have been appointed to the post of financial clerk, purchase clerk W.H / Clerk respectively and they have been given Rs. 3650/- basic P.M as per appointment letters (Ext.-W/2 Series) however, as per the advertisement their salary slab is 1.14 to 1.25 Lacs P.A meaning there by they should get Rs. 9500/- P.M basic after the probation with increment of each year and D.A ( IDA ) to the enhanced basic till date and they should also get M.A, HRA too but company did not provide revised pay and other allowances as per letter of demand filed by the workman side i.e ( Ext.-W/4 ). This tribunal further finds that workman Amit Kumar Tiwari has been appointed to the post of Instrumentation Mechanic whose basic salary Rs. 3800/- basic salary is shown in his appointment letter ( Ext.-W/2 Series ) however, as per advertisement the salary slab of Instrumentation3812 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Mechanic is 1.05 to 1.25 Lacs P.A but he was also not received the revised VDA and HRA, M.A like other workmen. This tribunal further finds that workman namely Shiv Prasad Mohanty and Chandra Kishore Baitha has been appointed to the post of fitters whose basic salary was shown Rs. 3650/- in the their appointment letters ( Ext.- W/2 Series) but as per advertisement their salary slab is 1.08 1.25 Lacs P.A but they also did not get revised VDA against revised basic and other allowance like M.A and HRA. This tribunal further find that workman Chandra Kishore Baitha filed his pay slip of the month of March to August-2019 ( Ext.- W/3-15 ) pay slip of August-2019 shows that he received basic salary Rs. 12,228/- VDA- Rs. 5649.15 and F.A 55.00.This salary slip shows that his basic is enhanced to the initial basic salary of the year-2011 but he did not get the proportionate VDA( IDA ) as per office memorandum regarding D.A filed by the workman as ( Ext.- W/5 ). This tribunal further finds that workman Dipu Kumar Srivastava and Sunil Kumar have been appointed to the post of Attendant ( Motor / Tube Well Attendant )and they have given basic Rs. 3500/- P.M in their appointment letter ( Ext.-W/2 series ) with an endorsement pay under revision, revised salary will be paid upon confirmation. As per advertisement ( Ext.-W/1-1 ) their salary slab is from 1.08 to 1.25 Lacs, per annum meaning there-by they should get Rs. 9000/- basic upon confirmation of the services besides it, they should get proportionate D.A ( IDA ) to the enhanced basic till date and they should also get M.A and HRA but company did not provide salary accordingly. Workman Sunil Kumar have filed pay slip of the month of March, August of year-2019 ( Ext.-W/3-16 ) his pay slip August-2019 shows he received Rs. 11,990/- VDA Rs. 5649.15, and FA Rs. 131.32. Pay slip also shows that he received enhanced basic to the initial basic of the 2011 but he did not get M.A, HRA and D.A according to the office memorandum issued by department of Public Enterprises, Govt. of India letter dt- 03.01.2019 ( Ext.- W/5 series ) according to the that memorandum the employee whose basic is above Rs. 9500/- should get minimum Rs. 3,00,11/- as D.A ( IDA ). This tribunal further finds that workman namely Rajesh Baitha and Neeraj Kumar Ray have been appointed to the post of Bagasse Carrier Attendant ( Feed Pump Attendant ) they have given Rs. 3500/- basic through their appointment letters ( Ext.-W/2 Series ). Workman Rajesh Baitha have filed his pay slip of the month of March to August-2019 ( Ext.- W/3-13 ) as per pay slip of August 2019 he received Rs. 11990/- basic and VDA Rs. 5649.15 and FA Rs. 177.00 certainly his basic has been enhanced from his basic salary at the time of appointment but he did not received proportionate D.A ( VDA ) as per office memorandum of dt- 03.01.2019 ( Ext. W/5 Series ) and company also did not give MA and HRA as per letters of demand ( Ext.- W/4 ) this tribunal further finds that one workman namely Sharan Piyush has been appointed to the post of Ware House Staff / Helpers and he has given Rs. 3500/- basic through his appointment letters ( Ext.-W/2 Series ) as per advertisement the salary slab of Ware House Staff / Helpers is 1,05 to 1.25 Lacs P.A but this workman also did not get the enhanced VDA after confirmation to the enhanced basic and also did not get MA and HRA. This tribunal further finds that workman Suraj Kumar W.W-1 have proved the arrear chart regarding his basic as per advertisement and regarding accrued VDA as per office memorandum issued of Govt. of India from time to time department of Public Enterprises ( Ext.-W/5 ) this arrear chart of all the 37 workmen from the year January-2011 to July 2019 of each workmen showing already drawn salary including basic, VDA, F.A, M.A and I.R till the months of December-2012 only i.e Ext.-W/6 to W/6-36 Series ). There is no cross examination of this accrued arrear chart furnished by the workman Suraj Kumar for all the workmen ( Ext.- W/6 to W/6-36 Series ) by the management side and there is no cross-examination to the office notification issued by Govt. of India Department of Public Enterprises regarding D.A ( IDA ) ( Ext.-W/5 Series ) from time to time by the management side. This tribunal further finds that workmen Vivek Kumar (W.W-2) who was appointed as DCS Operator also supported the claim of all the 37 workmen regarding not paying the proportionate VDA ( IDA ) and other allowances, HRA in examination-in-chief he also stated that as per advertisement ( Ext.-W/1-1 ) salary slab was 1.08 to 1.25 Lacs P.A but he was given Rs. 3500/- Basic at the time of issuance appointment letter however, it should be Rs. 9000/- P.M Basic. This witness also supported that the company has issued appointment letters with an endorsement pay under revision and that will revised after confirmation. He also supported the version of Suraj Kumar ( W.W-1 ) regarding the letter of demand ( Ext.-W/4 ) salary and allowance not given by the management. This witness also proved the applications filed by all the 37 workmen putting their signature to CEO, HPCL in the year 2016, 2017 and 2018 regarding giving proportionate IDA and other allowances i.e marked Ext.- W/8 to W/8-1, and W/8-2 respectively. In cross-examination this witness categorically stated that their grievances isrelated to the salary and IDA besides the allowances like HRA and M.A. This witness also admitted in cross-examination salary enhanced but it is not enhanced to the actual proportion that ought to be given by the management. This witness has been cross-examined at length but management side failed to discard his testimony regarding the dispute as raised by the workmen in their letter of demand. 16. This tribunal further finds that M.W-1 stated that the salary of non management, workmen are as per direction of the Sugar Wage Board and other allowances is also fixed by notification of Sugar Wage Board but in the advertisement Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1 this is no where mentioned that salary slab of workmen shall be governed with the notification of Sugar Wage Board. Moreover, appointment letters issued to the workmen i.e Ext.-W/2 also does not show the salary and allowances shall be given as per the notification of Sugar Wages Board are appointment letter is issued by HPCL Biofuels showing a wholly owned subsidiary company of HPCL and this is also admitted by the M.W-1 in para-31 of the cross-examination and M.W-1 also admits that HPCL is the controlling company of HBL. Document Ext.-M/1 of the management shows the financial report of HPCL Biofuels of the year 2019-20 and 2020-21. This documents simply financials report as issued of director to share holders i.e not related to the letter of demand of the workmen for which the reference is sent to this tribunal, moreover, this documents also does not show[भाग II— ण् ड 3(ii)] भारत का रािृत्र : जसतम् बर 7, 2024/भाद्र 16, 1946 3813 the name of HPCL Biofuels Ltd. Ext.-M/2 the process follow diagram of HPCL Lauraya units i.e not related to the dispute raised by the workmen by way of letter of demand ( Ext.- W/4 ). Ext.-M/3 is the GPA unnamed policy schedule showing insured’s name has HPCL Biofuels Ltd. for the coverage of 1050 employees i.e the effective from 15.01.2022 to 14.01.2023 this documents has no meaning to this reference because this reference case is of the year 2019 and dispute raised by the workmen on 23.10.2018 ( Ext.-W/4 ) for not getting proportionate basic and allowances as per advertisement. Ext.-M/4 is the letter dt-20.04.2016 issued by CEO of HPCL Biofuels Ltd and the same is sent to Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum Natural Gas regarding complaint of the with workmen in which it is mentioned the CEO has already apprised to the permanent employees of their complaint dt- 25.09.2015 vide reply letter dt- 19.01.2016 and it is also mentioned salary structure of permanent employee is paid according to the Sugar Wage Board notification but copy of the reply of 19.01.2016 is not produced by the management sides so this documents is not complete documents i.e wanted to be shown by the management side. Management has filed HR Policy of HPCL Biofuels Ltd has Ext.-M/5 but this documents does not show when this HR policy came into force i.e also admitted by M.W-2 in para-33 of the cross-examination. This tribunal further find that M.W-1 deposed of the workmen are native of the places where the company is situated they have own house and accommodation so do not require any HRA. This is very absurd evidence given by M.W-1 because company or any institution gives employment to the workmen through proper advertisement followed by written examination, interview and medical that was not exclusively for the local residents moreover, HRA is right of permanent employee but the reason has shown by M.W-1 for not requirement HRA has not acceptable at all. This tribunal further finds that M.W-3 has prove the appointment letter of Suraj Kumar the workman ( W.W-1 ) issued on 31.12.2010 as Ext.-M/6 and he also filed order of the Hon’ble High Court Madras of dt- 28.02.2011 has Ext.-M/7 but this witness does not disclosed what is the relevance of this order to this reference case. This witness categorically stated in para-25 of the cross-examination the appointment letter of Suraj Kumar Ext.-M/6 is issued according to the salary description of advertisement but on scrutinizing the salary description has shown in advertisement Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1 it is not mentioned in the appointment letter ( Ext.- W/2 ). 17. On the scrutinizing all the facts as placed by the rival parties and as well as their argument, this tribunal finds that management side has stressed that the workmen claims is not is an Industrial Dispute because on which basis they are claiming their pay fixation and other allowances (Advertisement Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1) because at the time of advertisement the company was not in existence but this contention is not at all acceptable because the basis of this reference is the letter of demand (Ext.-W/4) however, workmen whose issues are involved as discussed above are definitionally got their appointment on different posts after applying on different posts vide the two published advertisement where it is clearly mentioned that the HPCL Biofuels Ltd. invited the applications for different posts as the commercial production of the company is scheduled from November 2010. This tribunal further finds that management also stressed when the company issued appointment letters (Ext.-W/2 Series) to the workmen mentioning all the terms and conditions and when they accepted the appointment letters, so their grievances of revised pay and allowances does not stand on the basis of two advertisement. This plea of management side is also not acceptable because in appointment letters ( Ext.-W/2 Series ) basic salary is shown lesser to the salary slab given in the advertisement but at the same time it is mentioned in the appointment letters pay is under revision, revised shall be paid on confirmation. This is the clear cut indication that when the workmen will be confirmed they will get revised pay that includes basic pay, D.A ( IDA ), HRA, M.A and fixed allowance ( FA ) that is Misc. allowances applicable to the posts but management side did not pay attention to the grievances raised by the workmen from time to time for their revised pay, IDA and other allowances. This tribunal further finds that management side stressed on this point that HPCL Biofuels Ltd. obviously a wholly owned company but the payment of salary of all categories of employees is governed with the sugar wage board but it is neither mentioned in the details of two advertisement ( Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1 ) on which basis the workmen applied on the different posts taking into notice of the salary slabs given in the two advertisement nor it is shown in the appointment letters of the workmen ( Ext.-W/2 Series ). Moreover, this is the clear fact that the two sick sugar units of Lauraya and Sugauli was taken by HPCL for the commercial production of Ethanol integrated sugar and power generation and it is incorporated HPCL Biofuels Ltd. the sister concern of HPCL i.e duly admitted by the management witness in their evidence and also admits HPCL Biofuels Ltd. does not come under sugar industry. This tribunal finds and hold that management side did not not come up with clean hands while advertised the different posts ( Ext.-W/1 & W/1-1 ) and they never apprised the workmen in the appointment letters too. This tribunal further finds that management side also stressed on this point that the dispute of the workmen is of 2011 when they got appointment but they raised their dispute for the first time before the ALC (C) Pakur on 23.10.2018 (Ext.-W/4) i.e stale claim but this tribunal also does not accept this plea of the management because workmen side right from very beginning raised their issues before CEO of the management company after completion of probation period i.e evident from the complaint / representation petition filed in the year-2014, 2015 and 2016 that is evident from Ext.- W/1, W/8-1, W/8-2. Moreover, workmen raised their grievance before the Hon’ble Court but it was advised to take back to exhaust their issues in the appropriate forum then workmen raised their issues before the ALC (C) Pakur through demand letter dt-23.10.2018 (Ext.-W/4). So their dispute is not stale claim, it does not come under the purview of stale claim. This tribunal also finds that it is mentioned in the written statement by the management side due to inadvertence and typographical error words CTC was inserted in the salary slab column of the advertisement but management side failed to bring any authentic and concrete evidence before this tribunal that3814 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :SEPTEMBER 7, 2024/BHADRA 16, 1946 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] any corrigendum or any notice was ever issued in this regards. So this is a kind of sweeping plea taken by the management just to save itself. This tribunal further finds that the salary slip of workmen Suraj Kumar (W.W-1) and Vivek Kumar ( W.W-2 ) of the year 2011 clearly show that they were getting basic not at per advertisements salary slabs but they received VDA, MA, HRA and FA. The salary slip issued by the management company was definitely is not in consonance of salary slab given in advertisement but it also indicates that they were getting VDA in place of IDA that was mentioned in the advertisement besides HRA, M.A and F.A but their salary slip of the year 2022 shows that both the workmen received only basic pay, VDA, and FA this is also variable without disclosing as the details of F.A vide Ext.-W/7-2 & W/7-3. Here company ought to pay to the workmen VDA (IDA) proportionately to the revised basic as per notification of Govt. of India regarding D.A (Ext.-W/5) and M.A, HRA and F.A too proportionately to the revised basic but management company, why did not give the proportionate IDA, and M.A, HRA and F.A is never discussed to the workmen and no authentic concrete evidence brought by the management in this regards before this tribunal too. This tribunal further finds that workmen side has filed the notification regarding the D.A issue by Central Govt. for public enterprises (Ext.-W/5) from time to time in which they have given the office memorandum of d- 07.01.2014 in which D.A the basic salary up to Rs. 3500/- is minimum Rs. 8790/- and basic above Rs. 9500/- the D.A is minimum Rs. 22,791/- like wise office notification d- 04.07.2017 shows that D.A is Rs. 10,432/- whose basic pay up to Rs. 3500/- and D.A Rs. 27056/- to the basic pay above Rs. 9500/-. They have also filed a office memorandum of department of public enterprises regarding D.A of d- 04.07.2019 where D.A is set minimum Rs. 12034/- to the basic pay up to Rs. 3500/- and D.A Rs. 31,208/- for basic pay above Rs. 9500/-. This document Ext.-W/5 is issued from the Government of India, Ministry of Heavy Industries / Public Enterprises but as per the notification the workmen never received ( I.D.A ) that ought to be given by the company in respect of their basic pay and this is the demand of the workmen i.e justified. This tribunal further finds and hold that after careful scrutiny of all the documents placed by the workmen side and management side as well, management did not make payment to the workmen according to salary slab mentioned in the advertisement after the confirmation of the services of the workmen and management also did not gave actual VDA in place of IDA to their proportionate basic and HRA, M.A, and F.A ( Misc. allowance ) applicable to the posts that was given initially by the management company but later on management withdrew the allowances like HRA and M.A i.e the right of the every workmen discharging duties in the management company. 18. Thus on scrutinizing of the facts and materials available on the record as discussed above, this tribunal finds and hold that workmen side has successfully established their claim as per letter of demand (Ext.-W/4) and thus workmen are entitled for revised basic pay as per salary slabs given in the advertisement on which basis they have been appointed by the company beside this all the 37 workmen whose details as given in para-14 are also entitled revised basic pay, as per terms of advertisement, VDA (IDA) proportionately to their basic pay as per (Ext.-W/5) the notification issued by the Govt. of India from time to time for the employees working in public enterprises in the different basic slabs grade. Workmen are also entitled to proportionate HRA, to their basic pay and M.A and F.A (Misc. allowance) too. Moreover, workmen are also entitled the benefits of E.S.I as they are permanent employees of HPCL Biofuels Ltd., the sister concern of HPCL, a public enterprises company has they are getting salary in each month of a calendar year. So it can’t be said, the workmen are seasonal employee. Thus on the basis of above findings it is the considered opinion of this tribunal that the demand letter dt-23.10.2018 ( Ext.-W/4 ) given by the workmen Suraj Kumar & 36 others (named above in para-14) of HPCL Biofuels Ltd. about their pay revision and payment of different allowance are proper, legal and justified. Accordingly management company is directed to scrutinize the chart of accrued arrears of pay and allowances given by the workmen through Ext.-W/6 Series, taking into notice of issued pay slips to the workmen of different salary slabs (Ext.-W/3 Series) and notification of Govt. of India, Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises regarding D.A (IDA) Ext.-W/5 and make payment accordingly to each workmen to his entitlement from their confirmation dates as per above findings of this tribunal within three month’s from the of publication of this award. This award is effected after date of publication in gazette. This is my award accordingly. Dictated & Corrected by me. MANOJ SHANKAR, Presiding Officer Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.