# Union of India and another v. Smt. Chandrakali Chaturvedi and others

- **Citation:** (2010) 2 ILRA 553
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2010-05-06
- **Case number:** First Appeal From Order No. 279 of 2001
- **Bench:** Devi Prasad Singh, Dr. Satish Chandra
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/union-of-india-and-another-v-smt-chandrakali-chaturvedi-and-others-41627
- **Pages:** 7

## Headnote

Motor Vehicle Act, 1998, Section 173read with Employees State insurance Act
1948-Section 53-deceased an employee
of Telecom Depott-sustained injury due
to rashness and negligence of Zeep
Driver of Depott.-Tribunal awarded Rs
287520 under motor vehicle Act-award
Challenged on ground-deceased being
member of employees state insurance
Act-not entitled for any amount toward
compensation-held Motor Vehicle Act
Specifically deals with accidental death,
injuries-while insured workman entitled
for
sickness
cash
benefit,
materily
benefit, disablement and dependents
benefits including medical care.

Held: Para 12 & 14

It is settled law that in case special law
does not cover the controversy, then it
shall be dealt with by general law. The
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, specifically
deals with the accidental death, injuries
and compensation payable thereon. The
Tribunal
has
rightly
paid
the
compensation
to
the
claimants
in
pursuance of the power exercised under
the Motor Vehicles Act 1988.
554 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2010
The aims and objects further clarify that
the insured workmen will be entitled for
sickness cash benefit, maternity benefit,
disablement and dependents benefit.
Workmen shall also be entitled for
medical care and treatment and related
dispute shall be decided by the Workmen
State Insurance Court.

Thus, the statement of the aims and
object (supra) for promulgation of the
Act is to provide necessary assistance for
the welfare of employee workmen with
regard to their health under the scheme.
The various fields covered by the Act
have been enumerated in Section 28
discussed hereinafter.
Case law discussed:
(209) 4 SCC, 2006 (1) T. A.C. 965 (S.C.).

## Text

2 All] Union of India and another V Smt Chandrakali Chaturvedi and others
553
the Court were to void a contractual
employment of this nature on the ground
that the parties were not having equal
bargaining power, that too would not
enable the Court to grant any relief to that
employee. A total embargo on such causal
or temporary employment is not possible,
given the exigencies of administration and
if imposed, would only mean that some
people who at least get employment
temporarily, contractually or causally,
would
not
be
getting
even
that
emploi6yment when securing of such
employment brings at least some succour
to them. After all, innumerable citizens of
our vast, contrary are in search of
employment and one is not compelled to
accepts
the
casual
or
temporary
employment if one is not inclined to go in
for such an employment. It is in that
context that one has to proceed on the basis
that the employment was accepted fully
knowing the nature of it and the
consequences flewing from it. In other
words,
even
while
accepting
the
employment, the person concerned knows
the nature o f his employment. It is not an
appointment to a post in the real sense of
the term."

24. For the foregoing reasons, there is
neither any illegality nor infirmity in the
order dated 23.03.2010 passed by the
learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the
present appeal filed by the appellant lacks
merit and is accordingly dismissed.

No order as to costs.
---------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 06.05.2010

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DEVI PRASAD SINGH, J.
THE HON'BLE DR. SATISH CHANDRA, J.

First Appeal From Order No. 279 of 2001

Union of India and another ...Petitioner
Versus
Smt. Chandrakali Chaturvedi and others

 ...Respondent

Councel for the Petitioner:
Sri K. D. Nag

Counsel for the Respondent:
Sri Deepak Kumar Agarwal

Motor Vehicle Act, 1998, Section 173read with Employees State insurance Act
1948-Section 53-deceased an employee
of Telecom Depott-sustained injury due
to rashness and negligence of Zeep
Driver of Depott.-Tribunal awarded Rs
287520 under motor vehicle Act-award
Challenged on ground-deceased being
member of employees state insurance
Act-not entitled for any amount toward
compensation-held Motor Vehicle Act
Specifically deals with accidental death,
injuries-while insured workman entitled
for
sickness
cash
benefit,
materily
benefit, disablement and dependents
benefits including medical care.

Held: Para 12 & 14

It is settled law that in case special law
does not cover the controversy, then it
shall be dealt with by general law. The
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, specifically
deals with the accidental death, injuries
and compensation payable thereon. The
Tribunal
has
rightly
paid
the
compensation
to
the
claimants
in
pursuance of the power exercised under
the Motor Vehicles Act 1988.
554 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2010
The aims and objects further clarify that
the insured workmen will be entitled for
sickness cash benefit, maternity benefit,
disablement and dependents benefit.
Workmen shall also be entitled for
medical care and treatment and related
dispute shall be decided by the Workmen
State Insurance Court.

Thus, the statement of the aims and
object (supra) for promulgation of the
Act is to provide necessary assistance for
the welfare of employee workmen with
regard to their health under the scheme.
The various fields covered by the Act
have been enumerated in Section 28
discussed hereinafter.
Case law discussed:
(209) 4 SCC, 2006 (1) T. A.C. 965 (S.C.).

(Delivered by Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh, J.)

1. Heard Sri K. D. Nag, learned
counsel for the appellant and Sri Deepak
Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the
respondents.

Appeal under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred
against
the
impugned
award
dated
09.02.2001 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim
Petition No. 21 of 1989 (Badri Prasad
Chaturvedi and others v. Union of India
and others).

2. In brief, the deceased Siddh Nath
Chaturvedi was an employee of Telecoms
Department, Lucknow, working on the
post of Assistant Engineer. On 04.10.1988,
while he was coming from Sultanpur to
Lucknow in the department's jeep no.
UAE-7465, because of rashness and
negligence on the part of Jeep driver, the
Jeep suffered with an accident and by
loosing its balance, Sri Siddh Nath
Chaturvedi suffered grievous injuries and
later on scummed to injuries in the medical
college. At the time of death, his monthly
income was Rs.3,357/- per month. The FIR
was lodged and dependents/legal heirs
have approached the Tribunal for payment
of compensation. The Tribunal framed five
issues. Out of which, the first relates to
accident occurred on 04.10.1988 because
of rashness and negligence on the part of
Jeep driver. The second issue relates is to
entitlement of the claimants for payment of
compensation. The Tribunal on the basis of
recorded evidence and after providing due
opportunity to the parties held that the
accident occurred because of rashness and
negligence on the part of Jeep driver. The
Jeep belonged to the Telecoms department
and accordingly, Tribunal held that the
department is liable to pay compensation.

3.

The
Tribunal
awarded
a
compensation to the tune of Rs 2,87,520/-
and divided to legal heirs and successors of
the deceased. Out of which, Km. Saroj,
Sarita and Vinay Chaturvedi were minors.
Feeling
aggrieved,
the
appellant
approached under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

4. Sri K. D. Nag learned counsel for
the appellant submitted that the deceased
was insured under the Employees State
Insurance Act, 1948 in short 'Act'. Hence,
in view of the above provision contained in
Section 53 and 61 of the Act, no
compensation be paid under the Motor
Vehicles Act. For convenience, Section 53
and 61 of the Act are reproduced as under:

"Section 53: Bar against receiving
or recovery of compensation or damages
under any other law. - An insured person
or his dependents shall not be entitled to
receive or recover, whether from the
employer of the insured person or from
any other person, any compensation or
2 All] Union of India and another V Smt Chandrakali Chaturvedi and others
555
damages
under
the
Workmen's
Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923), or
any other law for the time being in force or
otherwise, in respect of an employment
injury sustained by the insured person as
an employee under this Act.

Section 61: Bar of benefits under
other enactments. - When a person is
entitled to any of the benefits provided by
this Act, he shall not be entitled to receive
any similar benefit admissible under the
provisions of any other enactment."

5. The provision contained in Section
53 and 61 of the Act may be made
applicable only in case the accident in
question may be covered under the
provisions contained in the Act.

6. Needless to say that the Act being
a special law, in case the case of claimantsrespondents is covered under the said Act,
then they may not be entitled for the
payment of compensation under the Motor
Vehicles Act. However, the close scrutiny
of the Act shows that the case of the
deceased was not covered under Section 28
of the Act. From the reading of the Act, it
appears that Act deals with the health
insurance of the industrial workers and not
with the accident occurred on the road
while moving in vehicle. The statement of
objects and reasons of the Act is
reproduced as under:

"Statement of Objects and Reasons:
The introduction of a scheme of Health
Insurance for industrial workers has been
under the consideration of the Government
of India for a long time. The necessity for
such a scheme has become more urgent in
view of the conditions brought about by
war. The scheme envisaged is one of
compulsory State Insurance providing for
certain benefits in the event of sickens,
maternity and employment injury to
workmen employed in or in connection
with the work in factories other than
seasonal factories.

(2) A scheme of this nature has to be
planned on an all-India basis and
administered uniformly throughout the
country.
With
this
object,
the
administration of the Scheme is proposed
to
be
entrusted
to
a
Corporation
constituted by central legislation.

(3) The functions of the Corporation
will be performed by a Central Board
constituted of representatives of Central
and Provincial Governments, and of
employers, workers and the medicals
profession. The Board will also include
certain members elected by the Central
Legislative
Assembly.
A
standing
committee of the Board will act as the
executive of the Board, and a Medical
Benefit Council will also be set up to
advise
on
matters
relating
to
the
administration of medicals benefit.

(4) The insurance fund will be mainly
derived from contributions from employers
and workmen. The contributions payable
in respect of each workman will be based
on his average wages and will be payable
in the first instance by the employer. The
employer will be entitled to recover the
workman's share from the wages of the
workmen concerned. Workmen whose
earnings do not exceed 10 annas a day will
be totally exempt from payment of any
share of the contribution, the entire
contribution on account of such workmen
being met by employer. Provision has been
made for the preparation of proper
budgets and the audit of accounts.
556 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2010

(5) The insured workman will be
entitled to the following benefits:-

(a)
Sickness
Cash
Benefit.-
a
workman, if certified sick and incapable of
working, will receive for a period not
exceeding 8 weeks in any continuous 12
monthly period a cash allowance equal
approximately to half average daily wages
during previous six months. He will also be
entitled to receive medical care and
treatment at such hospitals, dispensaries
or other institutions to which the factory in
which he is employed may be allotted.

(b)
Maternity
Benefit.-
Women
workers will be entitled to receive a
maternity benefit at 12 annas a day for 12
weeks. They will also be entitled to medical
aid at the aforesaid medical institutions.

(c) Disablement and Dependants'
Benefit.-
A
workman
disable
by
employment injury will receive for the
period of disablement or life depending on
whether the disablement is temporary or
full and permanent, as the case may be a
monthly pension equivalent to half his
average wages during the previous twelve
months, subject to a maximum and
minimum. Where disablement is partial,
the
pension
will
be
proportionately
reduced. In case of death resulting from
employment injury the pension will be
payable to the widow or widows' minor
sons and minor and unmarried daughters
or in case there are no widow and
legitimate children, to other dependents of
the deceased workman. The workman will
also be entitled to medical care and
treatment.

(6). Medical care and treatment to
insured workman will be provided by
Provincial Governments at such hospitals,
dispensaries and other institutions as may
be prescribed for the purpose. The cost of
the medical benefit will be shared between
the Provincial Government and the
Corporation in such proportions as may be
agreed upon between them. In case the
average incidence of sickness cash benefit
in any Province is in excess of the all-India
average, Provincial Government will also
bear such share of the cost of the excess
incidence as may be agreed upon between
it and the Corporation.

(7). Workmen's State Insurance
Courts will be set up to decide disputes
and adjudicate on claims. The cost of the
tribunal will be paid by the insurance fund.

(8)Central Government will make
rules
on
matters
relating
to
the
administration of the Corporation, such as
nomination and election of members of the
Board, Standing Committee,
Medical
Benefit Council, powers and duties of the
principal
officers,
raising
of
loans,
investment of funds, accounts to be
maintained by the Corporation, their audit
and publication. Provincial Government
will make rules on matters relating to the
Workmen's insurance Courts to be set up
under the Act, establishment of hospitals,
dispensaries, medical institutions, etc. and
the scale of medical benefit to be provided
to insured persons. The Board will make
regulations on matters relating to the
working of the scheme, e.g., collection of
contributions, payment of benefits, returns
and other particulars to be submitted by
employers in respect of workmen employed
by them, the conditions to the observed by
insured persons, in receipt of benefits, etc."

7. The statement of aims, objects and
reasons for the promulgation of Act is to
formulate a scheme of health insurance for
2 All] Union of India and another V Smt Chandrakali Chaturvedi and others
557
industrial worker and not to deal with
accidental death. It has been planned on all
India basis uniformly throughout the
country
managed
by
Central
Board
consisting representatives of the Central
and Provincial Government. The insurance
fund is derived from contribution of the
employees and workmen, which is based
on average wages and employer has been
authorized to recover the workmen's share
from their wages.

8. The aims and objects further
clarify that the insured workmen will be
entitled for sickness cash benefit, maternity
benefit,
disablement
and
dependents
benefit. Workmen shall also be entitled for
medical care and treatment and related
dispute shall be decided by the Workmen
State Insurance Court.

Thus, the statement of the aims and
object (supra) for promulgation of the Act
is to provide necessary assistance for the
welfare of employee workmen with regard
to their health under the scheme. The
various fields covered by the Act have
been enumerated in Section 28 discussed
hereinafter.

9. Apart from above, the payment
under the Act is made from the fund
generated in accordance to the statutory
provisions. Section 26 provides that there
shall be contribution in the State Insurance
Fund and all contributions paid under this
Act and all other moneys received on
behalf of the Corporation shall be paid into
a fund called the 'Employees State
Insurance Fund'.

10. The fund so generated under
Section 26 of the Act shall be used for the
purpose enumerated in Section 28 of the
Act. For convenience, Section 28 of the
Act is reproduced as under:

Section 28. Purposes for which the
Fund may be expended : Subject to the
provisions of this Act and of any rules
made by the Central Government in that
behalf, the Employees' State Insurance
Fund shall be expended only for the
following purposes, namely:--

(i) payment of benefits and provision
of medical treatment and attendance to
insured persons and, where the medical
benefit is extended to their families, the
provision of such medical benefit to their
families, in accordance with the provisions
of this Act and defraying the charges and
costs in connection therewith;

(ii) payment of fees and allowances
to members of the Corporation, the
Standing Committee and the Medical
Benefit Council, the Regional Boards,
Local Committees and Regional and Local
Medical Benefit Councils;

(iii) payment of salaries, leave and
joining time allowances, travelling and
compensatory allowances, gratuities and
compassionate
allowances,
pensions,
contributions to provident or other benefit
fund of officers and servants of the
Corporation and meeting the expenditure
in respect of offices and other services set
up for the purpose of giving effect to the
provisions of this Act;

(iv) establishment and maintenance
of hospitals, dispensaries and other
institutions and the provision of medical
and other ancillary services for the benefit
of insured persons and, where the medical
benefit is extended to their families;
558 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2010

(v) payment of contributions to any
State Government, local authority or any
private body or individual, towards the
cost of medical treatment and attendance
provided to insured persons and, where the
medical benefit is extended to their
families, including the cost of any building
and equipment, in accordance with any
agreement
entered
into
by
the
Corporation;

(vi) defraying the cost (including all
expenses) of auditing the accounts of the
Corporation and of the valuation of its
assets and liabilities;

(vii) defraying the cost (including all
expenses) of the Employees' Insurance
Courts set up under this Act;

(viii) payment of any sums under any
contract entered into for the purposes of
this Act by the Corporation or the Standing
Committee
or
by
any
officer
duly
authorized by the Corporation or the
Standing Committee in that behalf;

(ix) payment of sums under any
decree, order or award of any Court or
Tribunal against the Corporation or any of
its officers or servants for any act done in
the execution of his duty or under a
compromise or settlement of any suit or
other legal proceeding or claim instituted
or made against the Corporation;

(x) defraying the cost and other
charges of instituting or defending any
civil or criminal proceedings arising out of
any action taken under this Act;

(xi) defraying expenditure, within the
limits prescribed, on measures for the
improvement of the health, and welfare of
insured persons and for the rehabilitation
and re-employment of insured persons who
have been disabled or injured; and

(xii) such other purposes as may be
authorized by the Corporation with the
previous
approval
of
the
Central
Government."

11. The plain reading of Section 28
of the Act, does not seem to make out a
case that it shall cover the accidental death
taken place while travelling in the vehicle
on road. The fund may be utilized for the
treatment and provide medical aid etc. to
the employees whose case is covered under
the Act. Learned counsel for the appellant
also could not point out any provision
under the Act, which may cover the
accidental death occurred while travelling
in a vehicle may be of the employer itself.

12. It is settled law that in case
special law does not cover the controversy,
then it shall be dealt with by general law.
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, specifically
deals with the accidental death, injuries
and compensation payable thereon. The
Tribunal has rightly paid the compensation
to the claimants in pursuance of the power
exercised under the Motor Vehicles Act
1988.

13. Apart from above learned counsel
for the appellant submits that the interest
paid to the claimant @12% is excessive.

On the other hand, learned counsel
for the respondents submits that in the
year 2001, when the award has been
passed by the Tribunal, the rate of interest
was around 12%.

While considering the question with
regard to quantum of compensation or
rate of interest, we have to look into the
controversy on the basis of the facts,
2 All] Haridaya Nand Sharma V State of U.P. and others
559
circumstances
and
situation
of
the
relevant period, when the award was
rendered by the Tribunal.

The petitioner counsel has cited the
case reported in (209) 4 SCC 377
Uttaranchal
Transport
Corporation
Limited v. Vimla Devi (Smt.) and others
and submits that the interest may be
reduced.

14.

So
far
as
quantum
of
compensation and interest is concerned, it
depend upon the facts and circumstances
of each case as some time, the interest
will be higher and the other time, the
interest may be lower. It depends upon the
banking and market rate. No material has
been placed on record by the appellant's
counsel to indicate that in the year 2001,
when the Tribunal has granted 12%, what
was the ordinary interest payable by the
Bank to its customers, hence interest paid
by Tribunal does not call for reduction. In
a case reported in 2006 (1) T. A.C. 965
(S.C.), Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. R.
Swaminathan and others their lordships
of Hon'ble Supreme Court had awarded
interest @12% per annum from the date
of filing of the claim petition while
affirming the compensation under the
Motor Vehicles Act.

15. In our view, the impugned award
passed by the Tribunal does not seem to
be suffer from any impropriety or
illegality.

The appeal is dismissed.

In case some amount has not been
deposited by the appellant, it shall be
deposited before the Tribunal within two
months from today and the Tribunal may
proceed in terms of the award. The
amount deposited in this Court shall be
remitted to the Tribunal forthwith.

No order as to cost.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 19.05.2010

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DEVENDRA KUMAR ARORA, J.

Service Single No. 2867 of 2010

Haridaya Nand Sharma
 ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U P & others
 ...Respondent

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri A M Tripathi

Counsel for the Respondent:
C.S.C

U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and
Appeal) Rules 1999. Rule-4-Suspension
order-without
application
of
own
independent mind of the appointing
authority-order passed at behest of
superior officer-not sustainable.

Held: Para-7

A perusal of the impugned order reveals
that
the
suspension
order
dated
16.02.2010
has
been
passed
in
pursuance of the directions issued by the
Special Secretary, Rural Development
dated 3rd February, 2010 and apparently
the suspension order has not been
passed by the competent authority after
due application of independent mind. As
such the suspension order cannot be
sustained and the same deserves to be
quashed.
Case Law discussed:
AIR 1970 SC 1894
(2001) 6 SCC 260:
(AIR 2001 SC 2524)