(1.) These four writ petitions are filed against common order dated 09.9.2010 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (the State Commission) in CD Nos.46, 49, 55, 56 of 2004 and FA No.179 of 2006 (against the FA there is no writ petition). Hence all the four matters are being disposed of by this order.
(2.) The background fact of the matter common to all the four writ petitions may be noticed, referring to W.P.No.24164 of 2011, which is filed against the order in CD No.56 of 2004. M/s.Patel Engineering Limited, the petitioner herein, is a company engaged in the business of executing civil works. It was given the contract work of APGENCO for the construction of Srisailam Left Bank Hydroelectric Project in 1991. In that connection, the petitioner took workmen's compensation policy (WC policy) from the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (hereafter, the insurer) covering skilled, semiskilled and unskilled workers against the accidents. THE WC policy initially valid from 22.09.1999 to 21.09.2000 was periodically extended. THE petitioner also obtained three other similar policies paying the premium separately.
(3.) The insurer filed counter affidavit opposing these writ petitions. It is stated that the State Commission passed a common order in four CDs and one FA, but the writ petitions are filed only against four CDs, and no appeal is filed against the order in FA. Further, the respondent submits that in view of the effective alternative remedy available to the petitioner, the writ petition is barred; and when the State Commission considered as many as 241 documents and adverted to all the points exhaustively, a writ petition would not lie. Under the Employees Compensation Act (the Compensation Act, for brevity), the petitioner has to work out the remedies elsewhere and approaching the State Commission itself is improper. On the merits of the case, the insurer would submit that the order in FA having become final, the writ petitions are not maintainable. As per the policy terms, the petitioner has to inform the insurer in case of any claim. But, payments were made without prior consent of the insurer. THErefore, the insurer is not liable to pay the amount.