ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. CHHTELAL MAHATO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accident in question occurred on 16.10.1993 and the claimant petition was filed under the provision of Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 some time in the year 1994. Sub -section (3) of Section 4 -A of thq Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 as it presently stands was inserted through an amendment in 1995 being effective from 15th September, 1995. Clause (b) of the Sub -section (3), supra, reads thus ;

(2.) FIRST of all there should be a clear finding by the Tribunal with respect to the absence of any reason for the delay and only based on such finding the Tribunal can direct that the employer shall pay the penalty as stipulated in Sub -section (3). Secondly, the penalty amount is to be paid by the employer only after a proper show -cause notice has been issued to the employer and he has been afforded a reasonable opportunity of explaining as to why the penalty be not imposed against him. Both these requirements of law, being mandatory, not having been met in the award under challenge in this appeal, the part of the award which imposes the penalty is declared to be null and void. It is, accordingly, set aside.