EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL Vs. PARA HEMBRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') preferred by the employer against the judgment and award passed in WC Case No. 23 of 1999 by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Asst. Labour Commissioner, Balasore. The substantial question of law which has been raised in this case is whether the death of the deceased can be said to be 'arising out of and in course of his employment' as used in Section 3(1) of the Act.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the contentions of the rival parties, it would be necessary to briefly state the facts of the present case. One Madan Hembrum who was employed as a Line man under Opp. Party No. 1 being exposed to electric shock on 30.10.95 and carried to Jaleswarpur PHC for treatment, expired on 31.10.95. The respondents who are the wife and children of the said deceased workman filed WC Case No. 23 of 1999 claiming compensation under the Act. On receiving notice the appellants who were opp. parties in the Court below filed their written statement admitting the fact that the deceased was working as a Line helper under Opp. Party No. 1 on 30.10.95. It has been further admitted in the written statement that the deceased while working as a Line helper under the direct control of S.D.O. (Electrical), Bhogarai under Balasore Electrical Division along with others under the supervision of the concerned Line man was engaged for cutting trees inside the village Jhatibani near Chandaneswar and while he was on duty he fell down from the pole and ultimately died. It has been further pleaded in the written statement that the deceased climbed up to the Sub Station D.P. at jhatibani for cutting the branches of the trees which were touching the L.T. line of the Sub Station and thus he fell down from the Sub Station pole by his own negligence either due to slip of his hand or loosing his balance and sustained head injuries.

(3.) MR . Nayak, Learned Counsel for the appellants, submitted that the deceased being a Line helper was not authorized to climb the electric pole and as such it cannot be said that the death of the deceased arose out of and in course of his employment. He further submitted that the deceased having died due to his own negligence, he is not entitled to any compensation under the Act.