LAWS(ALL)-1995-5-87

SHAKTI INDUSTRIES Vs. SURESH CHANDRA SHARMA

Decided On May 08, 1995
SHAKTI INDUSTRIES Appellant
V/S
SURESH CHANDRA SHARMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri Ramjit Singh son of Sri Ram Chandra resident of Ahirhada. P.S. Harduaganj. Aligarh who figures as respondent No. 3 in this Writ Petition filed the case under Section 22 of Workmen's Compensation Act, before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. In the said case Sri Ramjit Singh who will be referred to as respondent No. 3 for sake of convenience, alleged that on July 28. 1984 he was employed as worker in the Shakti Industries. Ramghat Road, Harduaganj. (the petitioner factory). During the course of employment in the factory, his right hand got amputated as a result of the hand getting enmeshed in the machine. The respondent No. 3 also alleged that he was working on the pay Rs. 300/- per month with the Shakti Industries, for the compensation for respondent No. 3 laid a claim of Rs. 25,200/- before Workmen's Compensation Commissioner/ Additional District Magistrate (City), Aligarh Tribunal.

(2.) Shakti Industries contested the above case by filing written statement and raised the objections as under:- 1. That respondent No. 3 was not posted in any capacity with the petitioner nor was working in the factory of petitioner. 2. That Additional District Magistrate (City) has no jurisdiction to hear the petition of respondent No. 3.

(3.) That the Additional District Magistrate, Aligarh was not nominated as Workmen's Compensation Commissioner by State Government under the provision of Section 20 of the Workmen's Compensation Act and there is no Gazette notification regarding the appointment of Additional District Magistrate. Aligarh. The petitioner insisted before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner that in the case filed by the respondent No. 3 the preliminary objections be decided before entering into the merit of the controversy. The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner did not accede to the preliminary objection raised, consequently the petitioner instituted Writ Petition No. 8359 of 1985. This Court by its order dated April 16. 1987 dismissed the writ petition and while dismissing the writ gave direction with regard to preliminary objections that Workmen's Compensation Commissioner can decide these points after taking the desired evidence, hence the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner should decide the case on merits. Consequently the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. Aligarh by virtue of his judgment dated March 3, 1989 awarded a sum of Rs. 25,200/- in favour of respondent No. 3 to be paid by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, this writ petition has been filed before this Court. 3. I have heard at great length Sri Satish Chaturvedi for petitioner and Sri Devendra Dhama for respondents.