Glad you have it working, albeit with a brute force solution.

Other than CD4060 being surprisingly inexpensive; was there a problem with the schematic I suggested?

Now that you have a working solution, I have some constructive feedback on your schematic drawing style.

1. You are using an ancient nomenclature for capacitance that might be interpreted as a much larger capacitance.
2. Be consistent in the way you draw circuit elements (e.g. the orientation of LEDs and their current limiting resistors, use either 'K' or 'k' for kilo ohms but not both, label all components).
3. Remove unnecessary bends and connection dots; be consistent with connection dot usage, as used on pin 9 of the 4060's.
4. Avoid loading outputs that are critical for correct operation.
5. C27/R57 forms a differentiator and it's more typical to draw the capacitor horizontal; though, paradoxically, when used as a power on reset it's drawn as you drew C24/R56.
6. You appear to have a stylized way of drawing series caps, I don't care for it because I kept finding myself trying to understand why they were drawn that way.
7. Since you only used 1 inverter, you could replace it with the transistor equivalent; excepting the case where the NAND was a spare gate. Why is it called Inverter2?
8. R63 is unnecessary.
9. D8 connection is sloppy.
10. A supply voltage would be more useful than "HI" for calculating RC time constants.
11. For complete circuits, clean up component labels so there are no gaps or document the gaps.
12. Consolidate your notes in one place.

Since I've critiqued your schematic, feel free to do likewise on mine...

Thanks, you have so thoroughly analyzed my schematic, all your comments will be taken in a positive stride, whatever has been pointed by you Is for improvement and adding to knowledge.

Having said that, since I was trying to find solution for a long time I had two 4060s and 4011 and other components already soldered on the breadboard, hence I used the Circuit posted by me else there is no problem in the circuit suggested by you.

1) Comment1: Can you please comment the correct way of displaying capacitors I use Orcad 10.5 for drawing schematics

2) Comment 6:Are you referring to C28,C29 and C30,C31 if so ,I needed 11 mfd for basic oscillations since this value was not available I used two 22mfd caps back to back

3)Comment 7 : Vey well taken, 4081 will be replaced by using Transistorized nand gate.

4)Comment 8 : R63 has mistakenly appeared in the Schematic ,in actual wiring R63 is not there.

5) Comment 10: Supply Voltage is 12V.

6) I will take care of Comments 2,3,4,5,11,12 in future and other suggestions.

 

1) Comment1: Can you please comment the correct way of displaying capacitors I use Orcad 10.5 for drawing schematics

For example, the values of C24 and C28 are given as 1Mf and 22mf, respectively. I believe what you intended was 1uF and 22uF, respectively. The 'M' prefix means Mega (million), while the 'm' prefix means milli (thousandth). Farads is always capitalized. Decades ago, it was common for mfd to mean microfarads.

2) Comment 6:Are you referring to C28,C29 and C30,C31 if so ,I needed 11 mfd for basic oscillations since this value was not available I used two 22mfd caps back to back

I'd draw them like this:

6) I will take care of Comments 2,3,4,5,11,12 in future and other suggestions.

Thanks, it'll make it easier to read your schematics.

 

For example, the values of C24 and C28 are given as 1Mf and 22mf, respectively. I believe what you intended was 1uF and 22uF, respectively. The 'M' prefix means Mega (million), while the 'm' prefix means milli (thousandth). Farads is always capitalized. Decades ago, it was common for mfd to mean microfarads.
I'd draw them like this:
View attachment 88045
Thanks, it'll make it easier to read your schematics.

Thanks,what you have pointed out is a blunder on my side, I shall be very careful in drawing schematics in future.

Following your useful suggestions and inputs,circuit presently on breadboard is under test for last 72 hrs and working satisfactorily.
Thanks once again.

 

Thanks,what you have pointed out is a blunder on my side, I shall be very careful in drawing schematics in future.

Don't be so hard on yourself; I wouldn't call it a blunder. It's clear that you're a novice and you just need people who care enough to give you some guidance.

Well crafted schematics and circuits require thoughtfulness and attention to detail. In most cases, but not always, it's obvious to someone who has been around the block a few times when a unit is wrong. Schematics should convey more than just how things are hooked up. Perfection isn't required or (realistically) achievable.