DIVISIONAL MANAGER SFC Vs. ASST. LABOUR COMMR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Contours of controversy involved in the present appeal make it imperative to notice Section 4A of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1923. It reads:

(2.) A bare reading of the aforesaid provision reveals that compensation under Section 4 of the Act is to be paid to the workman or the dependants of the workman as soon as it falls due. In case the compensation payable under the Act is not paid within one month from the date it fell due the Commissioner under Act may subject to the conditions laid down in Section 4A(3)(b) direct the employer to pay, in addition to the amount of arrears and interest thereon, the sum not exceeding 50 % of such amount by way of penalty. Since the powers of Commissioner under the Act to direct the payment of penalty have a reference to the date the compensation has fallen due, it is necessary to first focus on this aspect of the controversy.

(3.) Workmen's Compensation Act is Welfare Legislation. Object of enactment as spelt out in the statements of objects and reasons is to achieve social security. The dependants of a work man who suffers an injury or meets fatal accident during course of his employment, cannot be left high and dry without any source to fall back upon. The Act makes the employer liable to pay compensation to his workman incapacitated by the accident arising out of or in the course of employment or in the event of death of workman, to his dependant's. It is a liability which flows out of the relationship of master and servant. Having regard to the ultimate objective of Section 4 of the Act, it becomes equally important to ensure that the compensation payable under Section 4 is paid without any delay and with due dispatch. Section 4A gives expression to the legislative intent to ensure immediate payment of the compensation so that it provides some kind of succour to the injured work man or to the dependants of the deceased workman. The rationale behind Section 4A is not difficult to comprehend. In case the employer burdened with the responsibility to pay compensation is allowed to delay its payment with impunity, the very object of the Act would be frustrated.