Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 1089 (MP)

P. S. METAL WORKS v. REZWAN AH

2000-10-04

DIPAK MISRA

body2000
DIPAK MISRA, J. ( 1 ) INVOKING the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of order dated 8. 6. 2000 passed in 9/97/wc/ nf by the Commissioner for Workmen's compensation, Shazanabad, Bhopal. ( 2 ) THE facts as have been unfolded are that the respondent No. 1 claiming himself to be an employee of the petitioner's establishment filed an application under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') contending, inter alia, that he is employed by the petitioner as welder on monthly wages of Rs. 3,000 and while he was discharging his duties on 24. 8. 1995 in the evening an accident took place by which he sustained serious injuries. He claimed an amount of Rs. 6,03,200 towards compensation from the petitioner. While the main case was pending before the commissioner, the respondent No. 2 herein, an application was moved on 6. 10. 1998 claiming a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 as an interim award. The Commissioner took the application for consideration and analysing the facts and circumstances of the case directed payment of Rs. 50,000 as compensation by way of an interim measure to the respondent No. 1. The said order is the cause of grievance of the present petitioner. ( 3 ) ASSAILING the impugned order Mr. Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a singular contention that respondent No. 2 has no jurisdiction or authority to pass an interim award under the provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder. In spite of service of notice there has been no appearance on behalf of respondent No. 1. ( 4 ) TO appreciate the solitary contention of Mr. Menon, I have perused the impugned order. The Commissioner has passed an interim award which is clearly perceptible from the order passed vide Annexure P-2. Section 3 of the Act deals with employers' liability for compensation. Section 4 of the act provides for amount of compensation. Section 23 deals with the powers and procedure of the Commissioner. The Rules have been framed under section 32 of the act and the M. P. Government has adopted the Workmen's Compensation Rules, 1924 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' ). Part v of the Rules deals with the procedure. Section 4 of the act provides for amount of compensation. Section 23 deals with the powers and procedure of the Commissioner. The Rules have been framed under section 32 of the act and the M. P. Government has adopted the Workmen's Compensation Rules, 1924 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' ). Part v of the Rules deals with the procedure. Rule 20 provides for filing of an application. Rule 21 deals with production of documents. Rule 23 deals with examination of the applicant. Rule 24 provides for the situation where the application can be dismissed in a summary manner. Rule 25 stipulates preliminary enquiry into the application. Rule 28 provides for framing of issues and rule 32 deals with judgment. In this context, it is apposite to refer to rules 28, 29, 31 and 32. They read as under:"28. Framing of issues. (1) After considering any written statement and the result of any examination of the parties, theCommissioner shall ascertain upon what material propositions of fact or of law the parties are at variance and shall thereupon proceed to frame and record the issues upon which the right decision of the case appears to him to depend. (2) In recording the issues, the Commissioner shall distinguish between those issues which in his opinion concern points of facts and those which concern points of law. 29. Power to postpone trial of issues of fact where issues of law arise. When issues both of law and of fact arise in the same case, and the Commissioner is of opinion that the case may be disposed of on the issues of law only, he may try those issues first, and for that purpose may, if he thinks fit, postpone the settlement of the issues of fact until after the issues of law have been determined. 31. Reasons for postponement to be recorded. If the Commissioner finds it impossible to dispose of an application at one hearing he shall record the reasons which necessitate a postponement. 32. Judgment. (1) The commissioner, in passing orders, shall record concisely a judgment, his finding on each of the issues framed and his reasons for such finding. 31. Reasons for postponement to be recorded. If the Commissioner finds it impossible to dispose of an application at one hearing he shall record the reasons which necessitate a postponement. 32. Judgment. (1) The commissioner, in passing orders, shall record concisely a judgment, his finding on each of the issues framed and his reasons for such finding. (2) The Commissioner, at the time of signing and dating his judgment, shall pronounce, his decision, and thereafter no addition or alternation shall be made to the judgment other than the correction of a clerical or arithmetical mistake arising from any accidental slip or omission. " ( 5 ) IF the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder are appreciated in proper perspective there is no provision under the Act or the Rules to pass an interim award. On the contrary there is a provision under rule 32 to pass a judgment. Liability is fixed under section 3 and quantification is made under section 4 in accordance with the Schedule provided under the Act. In view of the obtaining factual matrix, i am of the considered opinion, the commissioner has no jurisdiction to pass an interim award. Accordingly, the order passed vide Annexure P-2 is liable to be quashed and I so do. ( 6 ) IN the result, the writ petition application succeeds. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed. .