PARMADA DEVI Vs. BISHWANIATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against the order dated 29,7.1999, passed by the Deputy Labour -Commissioner -cum -Commissioner Work men 'sCommnasation Court, Gaya in W.C. case No. 22 of 1998 (Most. Parmada Devi V/s. Shri Bishwanath Singh & others), whereby he has dismissed the claim application under section 10 of the Workmen 's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) LATE Deo Bansh Singh, husband of the present claimant, was in the employment of Bishwanath Singh, the original respondent, before this Court. He (Bishwanath Singh) died during the pendency of the present appeal and has been substituted by his three sons who are now the respondents. According to the claim application, Deo Bansh Singh was an employee of Sri Bishwanath Singh, and died during the course of his duty while driving the motor transport owned by the said Bishwanath Singh. The present appellant filed claim application which has been rejected by the impugned order.

(3.) ON a perusal of the impugned order and consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it appears to me that the learned Deputy Labour Commissioner did not have jurisdiction in terms of section 20(1) of the Act. It appears from the Government notification bearing S.O. No. 1188, L & E. dated 31.12.1991, issued in terms of section 20(1) of the Act that the Presiding Officer of the concerned Labour Court has been declared as the ex -officio Commissioner for Workmen 'sCompensation to deal with all contested case arising under the Act and the rules framed thereunder, and an officer other than the Presiding. Officer of the Labour Court has been declared as exofficio Commissioner for Workmen 'sCompensation to deal with non - contested cases only arising under the Act and the rules framed thereunder.