DEPOT MANAGER APSRTC SIRCILLA DEPOT Vs. R DEVALAXMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, represented by the Depot Manager, Siricilla Depot, Karimnagar Region (for brevity 'the Corporation'), assailing the order dated 23.08.2002 in W.C.Case No.64 of 2000 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Karimnagar (for brevity 'the Commissioner').

(2.) The facts in brief are that the legal representatives, i.e., the wife and the two minor children of the deceased employee, filed an application before the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation in W.C.Case No.64 of 2000 invoking Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (for brevity 'the Act'), seeking compensation on account of the death of the deceased employee, in course of his employment in the Corporation. The deceased employee, viz., Mr. R.Narsayya, with employment code No.319618, being the driver in the Corporation, on 24.09.1998 was allotted the bus to be plied between Siricilla and Illanthakunta. Having finished the first two trips, while he was on the third trip from Siricilla to Illanthakunta at about 11-00 p.m., suddenly he drove the bus to the margin of the road and vomited profusely complaining of severe chest pain. Alarmed at the situation, the conductor stopped a private jeep coming from the opposite direction and took the driver to the nearest doctor in Siricilla by 12-30 p.m. The doctor, however, declared the driver brought dead. On examination of the deceased, the doctor certified that he had died of acute cardiac failure. Soon thereafter, the 1st respondent, i.e., wife of the deceased, got the news and rushed to the clinic, from where both the conductor and the wife of the deceased took the deceased-workman to the Government hospital, where too, doctors declared that the workman had been brought dead and advised them to take the body away. The conductor immediately informed the Depot Manager and other staff, who later visited the hospital. Though the Depot Manager was said to have been requested to have a postmortem conducted, the request was refused and the dead body was asked to be taken home.

(3.) As a matter of further development, despite the representation of the workers' union and also written representation dated 15.11.1999 submitted by the wife of the deceased to extend the benefits to the bereaved family, the Management has insisted on production of a medical certificate, which, in fact, was submitted on 05.06.2000. Despite the compliance with the requirement, the dependents of the deceased have not been extended any benefits by the Corporation. Under those circumstances, the wife and the minor children of the deceased have invoked the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1953.