LAWS(HPH)-1986-1-6

AMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On January 06, 1986
AMAR SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, aged about 35, claims to belong to a poor family. He addressed an application to one of us (Chief Justice), which was registered as a writ petition, in the course of which he has submitted that he sustained injury on account of a motor accident which occurred on March 31, 1982 near the nursery of village Puruwala across river Giri and that the vehicle involved in the accident was Jeep No. HPS 344, owned by the Irrigation and Public Health Division, H.P., PWD, Paonta Sahib. The case of the petitioner is that he has become totally disabled ever since the accident, which has caused grievous injury on his left leg, and that he is rendered unemployed and a victim of undeserved want. The grievance of the petitioner is that ever since the date of the accident, he had been assured by the authorities of the Irrigation and Public Health Department, HP., PWD, Paonta Sahib that he would be given compensation but he has not received any amount towards compensation so far. The petitioner has, therefore, sought an appropriate direction against respondent Nos. 1 to 4 or the insurer of the vehicle to pay compensation to him in accordance with law.

(2.) THE petitioner has already instituted proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, H.P., PWD, Solan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner'.). Those proceedings are still pending before the Commissioner. The Commissioner was, therefore, ordered to be joined as a party-respondent. The Commissioner has filed an affidavit, dated December 2b, 1985, stating, inter alia, that he had received a report from the Executive Engineer, Irrigation and Public Health Division, H.P., PWD, Paonta Sahib, vide letter dated April 24, 1982, on the basis of which proceedings under the Act were started but they could not be concluded because the medical certificate indicating the extent of disability, police report, wage chart, etc. were not placed on the record of the case. The Commissioner has also stated that according to the report received by him from the fourth respondent (Assistant Engineer, Irrigation and Public Health Sub-Division, H.P., PWD. Paonta Sahib), the petitioner is not a 'workman' within the meaning of the Act and that, therefore, the proceedings under the Act may not be competent.

(3.) THE fact that the petitioner has sustained an injury in the course of an accident which took place at about 4 p.m. on March 31, 1982, near the nursery of village Puruwala across river Giri and that the vehicle involved in the accident was owned by the Irrigation and Public Health Division, H.P., PWD, Paonta Sahib, and was being driven at the relevant time by driver Jagat Singh employed in the said Division is not in dispute. Annexure R-l, is a letter, dated April 5, 1982, addressed by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation and Public Health Division, HP., PWD, Paonta Sahib, to the Superintending Engineer, Giri Irrigation Circle, H.P., PWD, Nahan, which amply bears out these facts.