SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 59

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
Punam & Poonam - Petitioner
Versus
Labour Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner Office, Kapurthala & Ors. - Respondents
CWP No. 17940 of 2023
Decided On : 05-02-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Brajesh Kumar.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vipin Pal Yadav, Addl. AG, Punjab, Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Ms. Manjari Joshi.

Timely execution and recovery of compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, are crucial to fulfill the compassionate intent of the legislation.

Headnote:

Employees Compensation Act, 1923 - Recovery of Compensation - Delay in Execution Proceedings

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought direction to conclude the execution proceedings for the recovery of compensation awarded under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, following the death of her husband while on duty.

Finding of the Court:

The court acknowledged the purpose of the Employees Compensation Act, emphasizing the need for timely financial assistance to the bereaved family. It directed the authority to decide the execution proceedings and conduct recovery proceedings within four months from the date of the order.

Issues: Delay in execution proceedings for the recovery of compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of timely execution and recovery of compensation under the Employees Compensation Act to fulfill the compassionate intent of the legislation.

Final Decision: The court directed the authority to conclude the execution proceedings and conduct recovery proceedings within four months from the date of the order.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Vashisth, J.

1. Petitioner – Punam @ Poonam, has filed present writ petition, for seeking direction to the respondents to conclude the execution proceedings/execution application dated 01.12.2022 (Annexure P-4), which is in regard to the recovery of the compensation amount of Rs.6,50,962/- awarded by the Commissioner under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Kapurthala, vide its award dated 27.11.2019 (Annexure P-1).

2. Facts narrated in the writ petition are that husband of the petitioner namely; Raju (aged 28 years), was working as a caretaker on an ATM installed by State Bank of India, situated at Railway Station Kapurthala. In lieu of the services rendered by him, salary of Rs.6,205/- per month, was being paid to him, and same was being drawn through Account No.20216833393 of State Bank of India, Kapurthala. While on duty, he expired on 11.08.2017. Thereafter, claim for grant of compensation of Rs.10.00 lakhs, on account of death of said Raju, was filed by the petitioner along with her minor daughters.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.1 – Commissioner, exercising its powers under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Kapurthala, vide award dated 27.11.2019 (Annexure P-1), decided the Claim Application No. ECA/02/2017, wherein, petitioner and her minor daughters have been held entitled for the compensation amount to the tune of Rs.6,50,962/-, which is recoverable from the Managing Director-cum-Directors, Castech Group, 58/30, Ashok Nagar, Near Tilak Nagar, Metro Station, Gate No.3, New Delhi – 110018 (respondent No.3 herein).

4. Besides, it has also been observed in the award that State Bank of India (respondent No.4 herein), being the principal employer, will indemnify the Contractor, as per Section 12 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923. The amount of compensation was ordered to be paid to the petitioner and her minor daughters along with interest @ 12% from the date of death i.e. 11.08.2017, till its realization.

5. Thereupon, for the purpose of recovery of the said amount, petitioner – Punam @ Poonam, filed her execution application dated 01.12.2022 (Annexure P-4), but same is pending despite the fact that entitlement of compensation was declared way-back on 27.11.2019 (P-1) i.e. about more than 04 years and 02 months.

6. This Court is well conscious of the fact that provisions of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, are primarily for the purpose of rehabilitation of the bereaved family or the employee, whosoever, is in dire need of financial help. Any kind of delay at the instance of the authority or in the judicial proceedings or the quasi judicial proceedings is a matter of serious concern, because such practice would defeat the very purpose of such a beneficial legislation, which has been enacted with compassionate view point of the law makers.

7. Taking note of the fact that the amount of compensation was adjudicated on 27.11.2019 (P-1), and an execution application is also pending for the last more than a year, respondent No.1, who is informed to be exercising the powers under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, is directed to decide the execution proceedings/execution application dated 01.12.2022 (P-4), and also to conduct the proceedings regarding the recovery of the amount, in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order.

8. With the aforementioned observations/directions, present writ petition stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top