BHARATH GOLD MINES LTD. Vs. HANUMAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are the appeals filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'me Act') by Bharath Gold Mines Ltd., K.G.F. (for short 'the employer'), against the awards made by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kolar District (for short 'the Commissioner'), awarding compensation to the workmen of the employer on premature termination of their services by reason of occupational disease, silicosis, contracted by them in the course of their employment. The respondent in each of these appeals is the workman concerned. As the employment of the workmen involved their exposure to the inhalation of dust containing silica, they contracted the occupational disease, silicosis, listed as occupational disease in Part C of Schedule III to the Act. The contracting of occupational disease, silicosis, by each workman made his employer to treat that disease as an injury arising out of an accident and in the course of his employment and to terminate his service between the year 1979 and the year 1982. When there was a demand made by each workman concerned on the termination of his services by the employer for compensation payable to him with reference to date of termination of his service, the employer refused to concede to his demand. It is such refusal which led the workmen to file applications before the Commissioner claiming from the employer compensation payable to them under the said Act with reference to the date on which the service of each of them was terminated. On equities held by the Commissioner on those applications, he made the awards. Under those awards, the employer is made liable to pay compensation to each workman based on his wages drawn during the year when he was initially found to have contracted the occupational disease, silicosis, and not with reference to the wages he drew on the date of termination of his service due to contracting of that disease. A penalty of 50 per cent on the amount of compensation which was said to be payable, but not paid, is imposed on the employer as per each award. It is also said in each award that the compensation shall be paid by the employer as per the provisions of the Amendment Act, 1976, though earlier it was held that the compensation was payable to workmen with reference to the date on which such workmen had contracted the occupational disease, silicosis. Feeling aggrieved by the awards so made by the Commissioner, the employer has challenged their validity by filing against them the present appeals under Section 30 of the Act. That is how we are required to examine the common question arising in these appeals, to wit, as to how, under the Act, the liability for compensation of the employer to the workman due to termination of his service on his contracting occupational disease, silicosis, has to be assessed.

(2.) AS it would be advantageous to refer to the material provisions of the Act which provide an answer to the said question requiring our examination, they shall be adverted to.

(3.) SECTION 5 of the Act, which provides for method of calculating wages, reads: