LAWS(HPH)-2005-7-14

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. BRIJ LAL

Decided On July 06, 2005
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Appellant
V/S
BRIJ LAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admitted facts of this case are that Jagat Ram was working as a work charge beldar, employed by the appellants. He met with an accident due to flood from left bank of river Satluj on 17.8.2000 at 8 p.m. Factum of accident was reported by Assistant Engineer, B&R Sub Division, HP PWD, Nirmand, District Kullu on 18.8.2000 to the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). As a result of it Case No. WCA-3 of 2000 came to be registered before the Commissioner. Finally vide impugned award total compensation in the sum of Rs. 4,51,718 was assessed by the Commissioner below, payable by the appellants. This was inclusive of simple interest at the rate of 12 per cent. In case this amount was not deposited within two months of the impugned award, i.e., from 16.8.2001, 50 per cent penalty was also payable.

(2.) When this case came up for consideration, the learned Advocate General urged that admittedly accident took place on 17.8.2000, whereas Explanation II to section 4 (1) of the Act, was amended with effect from 8.12.2000 vide Central Act 46 of 2000 and by this amendment for words 'two thousand rupees' words 'four thousand rupees' were substituted. Thus according to him, for the purpose of calculation of the compensation in this case figure of Rs. 2,000 is to be taken and its 50 per cent has to be multiplied by the relevant factor, which is 201.66 as per Schedule IV of the Act keeping in view the age of the deceased being 33 years.

(3.) So far as submission of Mr. Chandel regarding age and factor is concerned, it was not disputed by Mr. Ghosh. He, however, urged that for calculating the compensation under the provisions of the Act, relevant date would be the date of award and not the date of accident. With a view to support this submission, Mr. Ghosh has placed reliance on decision of the Supreme Court in Rathi Menon v. Union of India, 2001 ACJ 721 (SC). According to him, this decision completely negatives the submission of learned Advocate General.