High Court · 2012

Heard Mr. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Dutta, lea rned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam, appearing for the newly impleaded responde nt No.4. None appears for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. The appellant insurance company has filed this appeal under Section 30 o f the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (now Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923) c hallenging the award dated 18.01.2001 passed by the learned Commissioner, Workme n’s Compensation, Goalpara, in W.C. Case No.13/2000 awarding an amount of Rs.2,2 8,540/- as compensation for the death of the workman, who is the predecessor in interest of the present respondent Nos.1 and 2 together with interest @12% per a nnum from the date of accident i.e. 12.01.1999 till the date of payment and dire cting the insurance company to satisfy the award, as there was a contract of ins urance between the appellant insurance company and the employer, namely, the res pondent No.3. The grounds on which the award has been put to challenge is that though at the time of institution of the proceeding being W.C. Case No.13/2000, the Lab our Inspector, Goalpara, was the Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation pursuant t o the notification dated 29.10.1999, in view of subsequent notifications dated 0 8.11.2000 and 03.01.2001 issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. o f Assam, Labour and Employment Department appointing the Addl. Deputy Commission er, Goalpara, as the Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation, the Labour Inspector, Goalpara had no jurisdiction to decide the said proceeding after issuance of th e aforesaid notifications dated 08.11.2000 and 03.01.2001. The other ground on w hich the award has been put to challenge is relating to the award of interest fr om the date of accident, though according to the appellant such interest is awar dable after expiry of 1(one) month from the date of adjudication i.e. 18.01.2001 . It has been contended by Mr. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the appellant that since the Labour Inspector ceased to be the Commissioner, Workmen’s Compen sation in view of the appointment of the Addl. Deputy Commissioner as the Commis sioner, Workmen’s Compensation vide notification dated 08.11.2000, the Labour In spector had no jurisdiction to decide the proceeding in W.C. Case No.13/2000 tho ugh at the time of institution of the proceeding, he had the jurisdiction. It ha s also been submitted that the Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation also ought n ot to have awarded the interest from the date of accident as under Section 4A of the Act the interest is payable on expiry of the period of 30 days from the dat e of adjudication. The learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent No.4 submits that even if the appointment of the Labour Inspector as Commission er, Workmen’s Compensation was modified vide notification dated 08.11.2000, the appellant insurance company having not challenged the quantum of compensation aw arded on merit except challenging the interest awarded, this Court, keeping in v iew the beneficial legislation, may not interfere with the award passed. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed an application on 19.06.1999 claiming c ompensation for the death of their son Fozrul Haque in a motor accident arising out of and in course of his employment under the respondent No.3 on 12.01.1999 a t about 10.20 A.M. at village Bakhalgaon on the PWD Road, involving the motor ve hicle bearing Registration No.AS-19/2510. The said application was registered an d numbered as W.C. Case No.13/2000. It is the claim of the claimants that their son was engaged as handyman of the said Mini Bus by the respondent No.3 employer , who died arising out of and in course of his employment. The appellant insurance company on receipt of the notice entered appeara nce and submitted the written statement denying all the averments made by the cl aimants/respondents. The respondent No.3 employer, however, despite service of n otice, did not enter appearance and contest the said proceeding. The claimants/respondents examined 2(two) witnesses being PWs-1 and 2 an d exhibited a number of documents. The appellant insurance company though filed the written statement but no evidence however was led by it. The witnesses exami ned by the claimants were duly cross-examined by the insurance company. The learned Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation upon appreciation of th e evidences on record has awarded an amount of Rs.2,28,540/- as compensation, ta king into account his monthly wage of Rs.2,000/- and the age being 16 years. Int erest @12% per annum from the date of accident was also directed to be paid. It appears from the notification dated 29.10.1999 issued by the Commissi oner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Labour and Employment Department (Anne xure-C) that the Labour Inspector, Goalpara was appointed as the Commissioner, W orkmen’s Compensation under Section 20(1) of the Act. The said notification was, however, partially modified vide notifications dated 08.11.2000 and 03.01.2001 appointing the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Goalpara as the Commissioner, Workmen’ s Compensation under Section 20(1) of the Act. The Labour Inspector, who was earlier appointed as the Commissioner, Wor kmen’s Compensation has accepted the application filed for awarding the compensa tion and registered the W.C. Case No.13/2000. There is no dispute that when the application was filed the Labour Inspector, Goalpara was the Commissioner, Workm en’s Compensation, which power was, however, subsequently withdrawn by the subse quent notifications. Even if the appointment of the Labour Inspector, Goalpara, during pendency of W.C. Case No.13/2000 was withdrawn and/or modified, the quant um of compensation awarded by the learned Commissioner having not been challenge d, I am not inclined to set aside the said award and remit the matter to the lea rned Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation for fresh disposal, keeping in view th e date of the accident being 12.01.1999 i.e. almost more than 12 years from now. However, as the application was filed on 19.06.1999, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 /claimants would be entitled to interest @12% per annum as awarded by the learne d Commissioner from the date of filing the claim petition. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed in so far as it relat es to the date from which the amount of interest is to be awarded, without, howe ver, interfering the amount of compensation awarded by the Commissioner. The Com missioner, Workmen’s Compensation shall release the amount with interest to the respondents/claimants by account payee cheque and upon due identification. If th ere is any shortfall, the said amount shall be deposited by the insurance compan y within a period of 1(one) month from today which shall then also be released i n favour of the respondent Nos.1 and 2/claimants. In case there is any surplus, the said amount shall be refunded to the appellant. The appeal is accordingly partly allowed. No cost.