Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Workmen s compensation_act_1923_196(2)


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Workmen s compensation_act_1923_196(2)

  2. 2. Eligibility for compensationPart 1: Is the injured person a workman?Part 2: Did the work injury disable him for more than 3 days?Part 3:Did the accident arise in the course of his employment? > Notional extension of employmentPart 4:Did the accident arise out of his employment?Situations when worker is not compensated
  3. 3. Compensation computation• Fatal injuries {40% monthly wages of the deceased} X {relevant factor} mentioned in schedule 4 subject to a minimum of Rs 20000• Permanent / total disablement{50% monthly wages of the deceased} X {relevant factor} Subject to minimum of Rs 24000• Permanent partial disablement> (schedule I, part II ) list of permanent partially disabling injuries> amount of compensation payable for total disablement is calculate> then % of that as indicated by the injury in schedule I, part II is taken• Temporary disablement 25% of workmen’s actual wages
  4. 4. Procedure for compensation• Notice of accident• Medical examination• Claim for compensation• Registration of the compensation agreements• Commissioner for workmen’s compensation• appeal
  5. 5. Some special cases Jharkand high court DB: Project officer, Giddi ’A’ colliery CCL, Hazaribagh Vs. Sanjay Prasad Chaurasia & another 2005 ILLJ 891 The workmen’s compensation act, 1923 –Section 2(d) and 10-A child in the mothers womb at the time of its father- workers death is ‘dependent’. However, claim made by the child dependent after attaining majority, is barred by limitation
  6. 6.  Kerela high court : V. Sukumaran Vs Union of India, 2005 Lab IC 2285 The workmen’s compensation act ,1923- section 4-Osteoarthrits was not an occupational disease and hence the compensation under the act was not payable. The disease must be attributable to a specific injury arising out of and in the course of employment.
  7. 7.  Orissa high court: National insurance company Ltd. Vs. Bijay Kumar Sahu 2002 Lab IC ,1026 The workmen’s compensation act ,1923- section 4- Powers of W.C. Commissioner to mould relief- the W.C. Commissioner has the powers to award compensation for temporary disablement even though the workman has claimed compensation for permanent disablement.
  8. 8. Modern Work EnvironmentBPO and ITES• Worksmen Compensation Act accepts owner’s Cab as the notional extension of work• This Cab may be owned by the company or hired from any private contractor• An employee who meets with any accident while in the owner’s cab may be compensated under this act• As a HR personnel we should make company cab mandatory in the interest of employees, in night shifts• This will also help in reducing the chances of litigation
  9. 9. Working out of office premises or from home• If a person meets with an accident on the road while on his duty, will be compensated (notional extension of work) eg. A salesman, meets with an accident while on a journey to meet a client will be compensated under the act• In it’s present form WC Act cannot cover employees working from their home• It is difficult to prove the relationship between the injury and work in such situations• Its better to cover employees under various medical insurances to protect them
  10. 10. Stress related to work• Various research have proved that stress related diseases like Hyper-tension, Ulcers, Hemorrhage and Insomnia are on increase• They also associate it with work related stress• If an employee is able to establish the relationship between his disease and work, then he is eligible to get compensation• It has to be proved on the basis of the report by a qualified doctor under the law• As preventive measures we should try to create a work environment to avoid unnecessary stress• Regular health check ups
  11. 11. Section XII• The employer is made liable to pay his contractor’s workman where he employs a contractor for trade or business• CASE: In state of Maharashtra Vs Mahadeo Krishna Waghmode, [(1994) 2 LLN 829]• The Bombay High Court observed that if the ESIS Hospital had a claim of indemnification by the contractor in respect of compensation payable to the dependants of the deceased, it was for the hospital to adopt appropriate proceedings.
  12. 12. Contd…• If the contractor is not a genuine contractor, and is merely an agent of the (principal) employer, Section XII would not come into play and it would be only the principal’s liability.• In S. Kaloo & Sons. Vs Ofatannessa Bibi [42 CWN 803(Cal)], the Calcutta High Court held that the deceased had been employed directly under the former; and that if there was any contract, it was not a contract to do the whole or any part of the work, but merely a contract for the supply of labour at a certain rate of wages per head.
  13. 13. Sub-Section (1) of Section XII• In order to come within the aforesaid, the principal in the course of the purpose of his trade must have entered into a contract with the contractor and also the work which is the subject-matter of the contract should ordinarily form the whole or part of the business.• In Rabia Md. Vs Agent, GIP Rly. [AIR 1929 Bom 179: (1929) ILR 53 Bom 203] the Bombay High Court held that the case did not fall within sub-section (1)• In Payyannur Educational Society Vs Narayani, [(1996) 3 Supp LLJ 1212] the Kerala High Court rejected the appellant’s contention.
  14. 14. Sub-Section (2) of Section XII• It provides that the principal employer will be entitled to be indemnified by the contractor in case the former is required to pay compensation to the contractor’s employees.• In Triveedhi Peerayya Vs Executive Engineer, Dam Division, N.S. Dam, Vijayapuri North [(1988) 2 LLN 483 AP] the court observed that the negligence was on the part of the principal employer and so, was not entitled to be indemnified by the contractor.
  15. 15. Sub-Section (4) of section XII• The provisions shall not apply in any case elsewhere than on, in, or about the premises.• In Bhuvaneswari Rice Mill, Guntur Vs Mannava Pullayya [AIR 1964 AP 392], the court observed that the accident occurred at a place where the work in question was being executed.