MUKESH BHIKHABHAI CHAUHAN Vs. KRISHNA OIL MILL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Aaditya D. Bhatt, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tanmay Karia, learned advocate for the respondent No.2.

(2.) Challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order passed by the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation on 24/10/2019, by which, the petitioner's application to withdraw the amount originally deposited, which had earned interest, has been rejected on the ground that the middle name of the petitioner being Bhikhabhai did not tally in the Register which showed the middle name as Nanjibhai.

(3.) Mr. Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the petitioner's father was Bhikhabhai Vithhalbhai Chauhan. The mother Manjulaben Bhikhabhai Chauhan died during the course of employment and, therefore, an application was filed under the Workmen's Compensation Act . Before the Court, the respondent No.2 - Company had deposited Rs.63,193.00. The amount was divided into two parts, between two children, namely; the petitioner and one Shri Ghanshyambhai Nanjibhai Chauhan. Admittedly, the share of Ghanshyambhai has been withdrawn by him. The amount of Rs.31,596.00 had been deposited with the State Bank of India, Rajkot Branch for a period of seven years. The application has been rejected only on the ground of discrepancy in the middle name.