The provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, including Explanation II to Section 4 and the third proviso to Section 30(1), are not violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

1. The petitioner who has already suffered by an order in W.C.Case No. 112 of 1993 on the file of Commissioner for Workmens Compensation has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition seeking a writ of declaration declaring the third proviso to section 30(1) of Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently seeks direction to set aside the order in W.C.Case No.112 of 1993 dated 112. 1996.

2. The case of the petitioner as seen from the affidavit filed by the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder:-

According to the petitioner, he is a Diploma Holder in Electrical Engineering and running a small Electrical Works shop doing rewinding of electrical motors and repairing of electrical appliances and job works. After starting of the factory, the second respondent management started giving job works to him for motor rewinding. The second respondent engaged some persons including the deceased Sivalingam the husband of the third respondent to do some civil repair work on the building on 20.5.1993 and the said Sivalingam is said to have slipped from the scaffolding and his left leg got into the window panel and succumbed to his injuries on the very same day. Taking advantage of his tender with the second respondent, the third respondent filed a claim for compensation before the first respondent. The first respondent after hearing the parties, passed an award holding that the deceased Sivalingam was employed under the petitioner and he died on 20.5.1993 due to the accident. The first respondent has also quantified the compensation as Rs.81,540 payable by the petitioner to the third respondent.

3. Initially he filed the above petition challenging the award in W.C.Case No.112 of 1993 dated 112. 1996. In view of the fact that a statutory appeal lies to this Court under section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, maintainability of the writ petition was questioned. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner amended the prayer in the writ petition. Accordingly, now he seeks to declare that the 3rd proviso to section 30(1) of the said Act which compels the aggrieved person against the award of the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation Act to deposit the entire compensation amount and enclose deposit receipt along with the memorandum of grounds of appeal when he filed an appeal before this court under section 30(1) of the said Act in violative of Constitution of India. In the additional affidavit he questions the Explanation II to section 4 of the said Act which reads as follows:-

Where the monthly wages of a workmen exceed one thousand rupees, his monthly wages for the purpose of clause (a) and clause (b) shall be deemed to be one thousand rupees only.

Me already challenges third proviso to section 30(1) which is extracted hereunder:- ...Provided further that no appeal by an employer under clause (a) shall lie unless the Memorandum of Appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the Commissioner to the effect that the appellant has deposit with him the amount payable under order appealed against.

4. Mr. Ayyadurai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner with regard to Explanation II to Section 4 submitted that the said explanation treats the big employer and the small employer alike which cannot be correct. Likewise, according to him, the third proviso to Section 30 is arbitrary and discriminatory. In that it does not make distinction between the small employer and the big employer while requiring the deposit as the amount awarded as compensation. He also submitted that the requirement of depositing the amount has no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved. The impugned provisions are totally arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

5. In have carefully considered his submission. The Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 which is a Central Act (Act 8 of 1923) was enacted in order to give relief to the workmen w