GENERAL MANAGER SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY Vs. SOYABA KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India at the instance of General Manager, South Eastern Railway is directed against order, dated May 6, 1994 passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, West Bengal, in Claim Case No. 435 of 1991 thereby holding that the husband of the opposite party was a workman within the meaning of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (1923 Act), and as such the claim case filed by the opposite party claiming compensation for the accidental death of her husband was maintainable. The only question that arises for determination in this application under Article 227 of the Constitution is whether a head constable under Railway Protection Force is a workman within the meaning of the 1923 Act.

(2.) For appreciation of the respective submissions of the counsel for the parties it will be profitable to refer to the provisions contained in Sections 3, 10 and 19 of the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 (RPF Act), as it stood on the date of accident and also the provision contained in Section 2(b) of the 1923 Act. The provisions are quoted hereunder:

(3.) Sri Sen, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contends that the deceased employee being a member of the armed forces cannot be said to be a workman within the meaning of the 1923 Act inasmuch as Section 2(n) of the 1923 Act specifically excludes a person working in the capacity of a member of the armed forces of the Union. According to Sri Sen, the finding of the learned Commissioner that the phrase "armed forces of the union" means only naval, military or air forces of union cannot be sustained in view of the clear language employed in the said section.