(1.) THESE are three appeals filed by the State of Madras, represented by the Superintending Engineer, Manimuthar Head Works Division, Manimuthar Dam, against the orders of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madras, in I. A. Nos. 221 to 223 of 1955 rejecting the prayer to make Sankiah Thevar, the contractor in charge of the works at the spot where the accident occurred, indemnify the Government and return to them three sums of Rs. 720, Rs. 720 and Rs. 200 paid by them in respect of the death of Mythar Bathi, Mytheen Bathi and Subramanian, killed by a landslide, under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
(2.) THE facts are briefly these: Mythar Bathi, Mytheen Bathi and Subramaniam were daily coolies engaged under the contractor, Sankiah Thevar, the respondent, in the Manimuthar Dam Works. When the work was in progress, blasting had to be resorted to between 12 noon and 1 p. m. , and, as it was a dangerous process involving considerable risk to life, workmen were prohibited from remaining at the workspot. The three deceased persons as well as other workmen were expected to work from 7-30 a. m. to 12 noon and again from 2 p. m. to 5-30 p. m. There was a break of two hours from 12 noon to 2 p. m. , when the workers were not only not expected to remain at the workspot but were not given an option to do so and were expressly directed to go away from the workspot, according to the contractor. The reason for this was of course the dangerous blasting operations between 12-30 p. m. and 1 p. m. Because of this at 12 noon a siren was sounded asking the workers to disperse and go away from the workspot. At 12-30 p. m. , just before the blasting began, a warning siren was again sounded asking the workers to clear out of the workspot as blasting was about to begin. Despite all this, the three deceased workers did not leave the workspot on 29 May 1954 at 12 noon, when the siren sounded, or even at 12-30 p. m. , when the warning siren sounded. At 12-30 p. m. , the blasting began, and at 1245 p. m. , as a result of the blasting, there was a side slip of landslide at an excavated spot. Unfortunately for the three deceased, they were then taking their lunch at that very spot with the consequence that when the landslip occurred all the three were buried by it and they died. Claims were put on their behalf for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, against the State, the principal employer. The Workmen's Compensation Act allows such claims to be preferred either against the principal employer or against the contractor directly employing the workmen as the claimants chose. The State of Madras did not contest the claims for compensation and did not also give any notice to the contractor Sankiah Thevar regarding the claims and allow him to contest the claims if he so chose, before the deposit of the amounts. The Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation awarded Mythar Bathi Rs. 720, Mytheen Bathi Rs. 720 and Subramaniam Rs. 200 as compensation under the Act. These sums are pitifully small for loss of human lives, but are the amount directed by the Act. It is not disputed by the contractor's counsel that if the claims are sustainable the compensation paid was reasonable and proper.
(3.) AFTER paying these amounts, the State of Madras, through the Superintending Engineer applied to the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation to make the contractor Sankiah Thevar, in whose section the accident had occurred, to indemnify the Government under the following clause in the contract between the Government and the contractor: It shall be the contractor's sole responsibility to protect the public and his employees against accident from any cause and he shall indemnify Government against any claims for damages for injury to person or property, resulting from any such accidents, and shall, where the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act apply, take steps to property insure against any claim thereunder. It was alleged that the contractor had neglected to effect any such insurance.