JUDGMENT Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - This appeal U/s.30 of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 has been filed for the following reliefs :- "It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed, the impugned judgment dated 30.7.2005 passed by learned Commissioner be set aside and the claim petition be ordered to be dismissed as against the appellant with costs throughout and/or in the alternative complete liability may kindly be fastened on the employer (whosoever it is) only and the award may kindly be modified accordingly." 2. Counsel for the appellant submits that the accident in-question occurred on 08.9.1995, whereas amendment in "Section 4(1) - Explanation II" of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 took place w.e.f. 16.9.1995 whereby monthly wages of workman was enhanced from Rs.1,000/- per month to Rs.2,000/- per month. 3. The core question involved in this appeal is whether amendment in "Section 4(1) - Explanation II" of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 enhancing monthly wages of workman from Rs.1,000/- per month to Rs.2,000/- per month, could have been retrospectively applied ?". 4. The learned Authority has applied the Amendment. 5. Counsel for the respondent has drawn attention of this Court towards judgment rendered by this Court (Jaipur Bench) in The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kailash Chand, 1999 WLC(Raj) 266 , relevant portion whereof reads as follows :- "3. In the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ashokan,1997 1 TAC 835 (Ker.)) , a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court has held that if any benefit is conferred on the workmen and the said benefit is available on the date when the case is finally adjudicated, the said benefit should be extended to the workmen. The Kerala High Court while holding so, has relied upon a decision dated 6.11.1996 of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal Nos. 16904-16909 of 1996. The observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have been quoted by the Kerala High Court in its judgment. The Kerala High Court while holding so, has relied upon a decision dated 6.11.1996 of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal Nos. 16904-16909 of 1996. The observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have been quoted by the Kerala High Court in its judgment. From a perusal thereof, it is clear that the Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held that the Act of 1973 is special legislation, for the benefit of labour, and, keeping in view the scheme of the Act, the interpretation which can be given to the amendment is that if any benefit is conferred on the workmen and the said benefit is available on the date when the case is finally adjudicated. The said benefit should be extended to the workmen. So, the award passed by the learned Commissioner applying the amended Act is held to be just and proper. 4. In view of the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the argument and contention of the learned counsel is not tenable, and the award passed by the learned Commissioner applying the amended provision is just and proper, and, no interference is called for." 6. Counsel for the respondent submits that, although, there was a gap of seven days in Amendment coming into force but since it is a beneficial legislation, the precedent law should be applied. 7. Counsel for the appellant, however, submits that judgment followed by this Court while deciding case The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kailash Chand (supra) has been over-ruled in Kerala State Electricity Board & Anr. Vs. Valsala K & Anr., (1999) 8 SCC 254 and the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically laid down law that compensation shall be payable as on the date of accident and not on the date of adjudication, however, the same order has clarified the law but has not interfered in the matter of compensation granted. 8. It is not disputed that in the present case compensation has been disbursed about 15 years ago except for penalty and it is not contested by Insurance Company because it is the liability of the employer. The benefit of welfare legislation granted on the basis of the prevailing precedent law of Kailash Chand (supra) cannot be recovered back at this belated stage. Thus, this Court does not find any reason to grant any indulgence. The appeal is dismissed. The benefit of welfare legislation granted on the basis of the prevailing precedent law of Kailash Chand (supra) cannot be recovered back at this belated stage. Thus, this Court does not find any reason to grant any indulgence. The appeal is dismissed. It is needless to say that the penalty shall be upon the employer.