IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD * * * *

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR C.M.A.No.384 of 2023 DATE:13.03.2026 Between Md.Nizamuddin …Appellant AND TSRTC represented by its Vice Chairman And Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, Musheerabad, Hyderabad and another.

…Respondents

JUDGMENT:

Heard Sri Ch.Indrasena Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt.Sai Mahitha, learned counsel representing Sri R.Anurag, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed assailing the orders dated 09.01.2023 passed in E.C.No.255 of 2017 by the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-IV, Hyderabad, in partly allowing the claim of the claimants by granting compensation of Rs.10,52,144/- out of the claim amount of Rs.19,59,444/- along with proportionate interest as claimed.

3. The facts leading to file EC before the learned Commissioner are that: the claimant was working as Driver since long time; that on 25.12.2015 at about 2.30 pm while he was proceeding on the bus bearing No.AP 23Z 0073 from Hyderabad to Basavakalyan and when he reached near Humnabad KEP bypass road, one goods trolley bearing No.MH 38E 874, which was loaded with iron rods came from opposite direction being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, dashed the bus, thereby an accident took place. The applicant stated that in the accident, he sustained grievous injuries besides multiple fractures and soon thereafter, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Humnabad, and later, underwent treatment at TSRTC Hospital, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.

4. The applicant stated that because of the injuries, he is not in a position to fold or extend his right hand becoming useless, and as such, he cannot perform his duties as Driver perfectly and therefore, he requested to consider his disablement and loss of earning capacity at 100%.

5. The applicant further stated that he was drawing more than Rs.15,000/- per month and that he was aged about 38 years as on the date of accident. He claimed Rs.15,00,000/- towards compensation along with costs and interest.

6. The respondents-Corporation filed a counter-affidavit before the learned Commissioner denying the averments made by the applicant and contending that the services of the applicant were regularized and he was drawing gross salary of Rs.22,398.40 paise per month as on the date of accident i.e. 25.01.2015.

7. It is further stated that due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus, the accident occurred, however, necessary treatment, medicines, leaves and other service benefits were provided to the applicant during his ailment and on being recovered from the injuries, he was referred to the Medical Board at Tarnaka Hospital to assess his fitness for the post of Driver, wherein the applicant was declared unfit for the category of Driver, but was found fit for the alternative post of Shramik in X2 category. Accordingly, he was appointed as Shramik at Zaheerabad Depot with effect from 12.05.2017 and the scale of pay of the applicant as Driver was also protected.

8. It is also stated that the medical expenditure of the applicant at Care Hospital and NIMS Hospital was borne by the Corporation, and that the applicant never suffered any loss of earning capacity and he is provided with alternative employment with salary which is more than what he was drawing earlier. Thus, it is stated that he did not suffer any loss of earning capacity as such he is not entitled for any compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, ‘the 1923 Act’).

Hence, prayed for dismissal of EC.

9. Upon consideration of the above pleadings, the learned Commissioner framed the following issues for consideration:

“i) Whether the applicant sustained injuries in the accident on 25.12.2015 during the course and out of his employment as a driver under the employment of opposite parties?

ii) What is the percentage of consequent