The employer is obligated to ensure employee insurance coverage, and non-deduction of premiums does not negate compensation claims under the Group Personal Accident Insurance Scheme.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs:

“A) For quashing the letter dated 30.03.2010 and 04.04.2010 (Ann-7&8) issued by Project Officer, Sawang Washery whereby and where under the claim of the petitioner has been rejected.

B) The Respondents be directed to pay the compensation of Rs. 5 Lacs to the petitioner under Group Personnel Accident claims scheme for the Accident/death of his mother during duty.

C) The Respondents be directed to pay the entire amount of compensation with interest.

D) The Respondents be directed not to treat this petitioner differently and extend the same benefit of compensation as has been given to others under group Personnel Accident claim Scheme.

E) Any other relief or reliefs for which this petitioner is entitled to.”

3. The brief facts of the case as it appears from the pleadings are that the Petitioner’s mother, Fucha Devi, was a Category-II Mazdoor at CCL's Sawang Washery and on 29.05.2007 she met with a fatal accident at the work site and died in harness. Thereafter, her elder son, Banwari Yadav, was provided employment and the petitioner was entitled to receive the compensation amount as per an Affidavit dated 01.12.2008 wherein Banwari Yadav had no objection if the compensation amount was given to the present petitioner.

4. In the year 2000, the respondent CCL had signed Memorandum of Understanding, hereinafter referred to as MOU with different insurance companies for CPA Policy wherein the sum insured under Policy would be Rs. 5 lakhs per person at a premium of Rs. 156 annually. The same was notified by the CCL vide letter dated 19.02.2000 for the deduction to be made from salary in connection with Group Accident Insurance Policy

5. Further, in year 2005, another MOU dated 05.05.2005 was signed by the CCL with the Oriental Insurance Company, for the period from 05.05.2005 to 05.05.2006 and subsequently, the next MOU was signed on 26.06.2007 for the period from 06.05.2007 to 05.05.2008.

6. On 28.09.2007, the petitioner applied for the payment of compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs under GPAIS Scheme from CCL and when no action was taken, he made several representations for the same. Thereafter, the Respondent, CCL vide letters dated 30.03.2010 and 04.04.2010 rejected the claim of the petitioner stating that GPAIS and GIC premium were not deducted from the salary of the petitioner’s mother during her lifetime, therefore, no compensation can be granted. Aggrieved of this, the petitioner has preferred the present writ application.

7. Ld. Sr. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it was the official responsibility of the CCL to deduct the said amount of premium from the salary of the employees and this was not an optional scheme; rather the same was mandatory and the responsibility was of the employer to deduct the premium.

She has also submitted that the MOU dated 26.06.2007 was made retrospectively effective on and from 06.05.2007 and it was operative on the date when petitioner’s mother died.

Ld. Sr. Counsel has further submitted that the points raised by the Respondents have already been decided by this Court vide its order dated 12.08.2009 passed in WP(S) No. 5663 of 2007 which has been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 449 of 2009.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent–CCL has submitted that since no premium was deducted from the salary of the deceased employee during