JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. Since the appeal stood admitted by this Court on the following substantial questions of law, consequently this court would confine itself to decide the appeal by merely meting an answer to it. “Whether the findings of the learned Commissioner with regard to 100% disability as against 30% given by the Medical Board, are erroneous? 2. The disability certificate prepared by the Medical Board concerned stands comprised in Ex.AW4/X. It displays of 30% permanent disability of Comminuted fracture left Tibia and compound fracture right distal femur and proximal Tibia standing entailed upon the workman in sequel to his sustaining injuries during the course of his employment under his employer. The workman was engaged as a driver by his employer. The nature besides per- centum of the disability reflected in the disability certificate is to be read conjunctively with the callings of the avocations which hitherto stood performed by the workman also it has to be construed therefrom whether the quantum of disability or its percentum permanently incapacitating him to perform the callings of his avocation. With reflections in Ex.AW-4/X of permanent disability of 30% of Comminuted fracture left Tibia and compound fracture right distal femur and proximal Tibia standing entailed upon the workman. Obviously when the percentum besides nature of the disability aforesaid perennially deterred him to especially when the efficient movement of his lower limbs was imperative for the efficient performance by him of the callings of his avocation as a driver under his employer, to hence perform the callings of his avocation. An apt result therefrom is of the disability permanently incapacitating the workman to perform the callings of his avocation as a driver under his employer wherefrom a concomitant sequel stands begotten of his standing entailed with a 100% disability vis-à-vis the callings of his avocation. An apt result therefrom is of the disability permanently incapacitating the workman to perform the callings of his avocation as a driver under his employer wherefrom a concomitant sequel stands begotten of his standing entailed with a 100% disability vis-à-vis the callings of his avocation. In sequel, even if a 30% permanent disability stands reflected in the disability certificate to stand entailed upon him, nonetheless the inference of his standing permanently incapacitated to perform the callings of his avocation as a driver under his employer would be facilitative of its being readable of rather a 100% disability standing entailed upon him especially when the per-centum of the disability ultimately tantamounts to for the reasons aforesaid a cent-percent disability vis-à-vis his standing perennially deterred to perform the callings of his avocation with the concomitant effect of his standing permanently disempowered to rear any income therefrom. Amplifying vigor to the inference aforesaid is garnered by the provisions of Section 4(b) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, which stand extracted hereinafter:- (b) where permanent total disablement results from the injury An amount equal to (sixty per cent) of the monthly wages of the injured workman multiplied by the relevant factor or an amount of [ninety thousand rupees] whichever is more; In view of above, the present appeal stands dismissed as also the pending applications, if any.