Madras High Court
The Executive Officer vs Ramayee on 18 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
and
C.M.P.No.9137 of 2019
The Executive Officer,
Vadakkanandhal Town Panchayat,
Vadakkanandhal Post,
Kallakurichi Taluk,
Villupuram District. ..Appellant
Vs.
1.Ramayee
2.Minor Kamali
3.Minor Periyasamy
4.Minor Jeeva
5.Periyammal
Minor Respondents 2 to 4
Rep.by mother Guardian
Ramayee - 1st respondent herein
6.The Assistant Director,
Special Village Panchayats
(Town Panchayat)
Cuddalore Zone,
Cuddalore – 607 001.
7.The District Collector,
Villupuram District, Villupuram.
8.The President,
Roja Women Sel-help Group
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
Opp.Police Station,
Prabhakaran Street,
Kachirapalayam. ..Respondents
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of the
Workmen Compensation Act, to set aside the award dated 10.01.2013
made in W.C.No.498 of 2007 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of
Labour-II, Teynampet, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Pradeep
For Respondents : R1 to R4 – Mr.A.Arun Babu
R5 to R8 – Not ready in Notice
JUDGMENT
The Award dated 10.01.2013 passed in W.C.No.498 of 2007 is
under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. The Executive Officer, Vadakkanandhal Town Panchayat is the
appellant. The Award was passed mainly on the ground that the
deceased one Mr.Ravi was employed by the appellant / Executive
officer as “Thupuravu Paniyalar” (Sanitary Worker) in order to clean the
public toilets and overhead tank in the Town Panchayat. He was a daily
wage employee and on 5.9.2004, the deceased Ravi was discharging his
duties as Sanitary Worker and while cleaning the overhead water tank,
which was on the top of the toilet, he was electrocuted by the live
electric wire and suddenly, fell down and thereafter, declared dead in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
hospital. The deceased Ravi died leaving behind wife/1st respondent and
three minor children as well his aged mother.
3. The application was filed under Section 10(1) of the
Workmen's Compensation Act, seeking compensation. The Deputy
Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues with reference to the
documents and evidences submitted. The factum regarding the accident
was established. The copy of the F.I.R, and Postmortem report were
considered by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour to ascertain the fact
that the death occurred during the course of employment. The findings
of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour reveals that the deceased died,
while cleaning the overhead water tank and on account of electrocution
and therefore, the death occurred during the course of employment and
employer-employee relationship was also established.
4. As far as the appeal is concerned, the appellant has not raised
any substantial question of law, deserve further adjudication. In the
absence of any substantial question of law, the appeal is not
entertainable. However, this Court has formulated a question of law on
the ground that the monthly income fixed by the Deputy Commissioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
of Labour is in violation of Section 4(1B) of the Employees
Compensation Act. Under the provision, the Central Government issued
a Notification, fixing the minimum wages as Rs.4,000/- during the
relevant point of time in the year 2004. Without complying with the
statutory requirement, the Deputy Commissioner of Labour has fixed the
monthly income of the deceased as Rs.1,980/-, which is improper and in
violation of the Central Government Notification issued under Section
4(1B) of the Employees Compensation Act. In view of the fact that the
provisions of the Act is violated, this Court is inclined to enhance the
monthly income of the deceased from a sum of Rs.1,980/- (Rupees One
Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty only) to a sum of Rs.4,000/-
(Rupees Four Thousand only).
5. Accordingly, the respondents/claimants are entitled for the
enhanced compensation. As far as the appellant is concerned, they are
not entitled for any relief. However, the respondents/claimants are
entitled for the enhanced amount, in view of the fact that the monthly
income fixed by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour as Rs.1,980/- is in
violation of Section 4(1B) of the Employees Compensation Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
6. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to fix the monthly income of
the deceased as Rs.4,000/-(Rupees Four Thousand only) and
consequently, the respondents/claimants are entitled for a total
compensation of Rs.4,30,560/- [50/100X215.28X4000] (Rupees Four
Lakh Thirty Thousand Five Hundred and Sixty only) along with the
interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the expiry of 30 days from
the date of accident.
7. In this view of the matter, the Award dated 10.01.2013 passed
in W.C.No.498/2007 stands modified. The respondents/claimants are
entitled for the total compensation of Rs.4,30,560/- (Rupees Four Lakh
Thirty Thousand Five Hundred and Sixty only) along with the interest at
the rate of 12% per annum from the expiry of 30 days from the date of
accident. The appellant is directed to deposit the entire award amount
with accrued interest within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the
respondents/claimants are entitled to withdraw the same by filing an
appropriate application as the minors became major and the payments
are to be made through RTGS.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
kak
8. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019 stands allowed in part. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.02.2021
kak
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-Speaking order
To
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II,
Teynampet, Chennai.
C.M.A.No.2116 of 2019
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
