SBCMA No.47/2009 Executive Engineer, Central Workshop Ground Water Department, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. TS Devani 1 SBCMA No.47/2009 Executive Engineer, Central Workshop Ground Water Department, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. TS Devani DATE OF ORDER : - 16.1.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.NK Mathur, for the appellants. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the appellants. The appellants' contention is that because of the application of the Group Insurance for the Government employees which has been applied to the Government Servants by Group Insurance Scheme, the application of the Workmen's Compensation Act stands excluded. It is also submitted that the aim and object of the Group Insurance for the Government Employees is to give benefits to those employees who may suffer injury or may die in any accident during the course of employment. The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Jodhpur SBCMA No.47/2009 Executive Engineer, Central Workshop Ground Water Department, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. TS Devani 2 in WC Case NO.1/2006 held that by providing a Group Insurance facilities to the Government Employees, the application of the Act has not been excluded. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal erred in interpreting the Group Insurance Scheme as the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner has failed to notice the aims and objects for which the scheme was enacted. It is submitted that in case the employees will be given this opportunity of approaching the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, then purpose of providing the compensation to the Government employee will frustrate. So far as exclusion of jurisdiction of any authority established by statutory provisions of law is concerned, it is required to be excluded expressly normally and even in a case where there is a plea of exclusion of jurisdiction impliedly then also there must be lawful reason for exclusion for that authority's jurisdiction. Providing two remedies for one relief in service matters is not absolutely a foreign matter or unknown matter. Admittedly, the Group SBCMA No.47/2009 Executive Engineer, Central Workshop Ground Water Department, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. TS Devani 3 Insurance Scheme has not excluded the application of the Act of 1923 expressly nor by this Group Insurance Scheme it can be gathered that the Scheme is substitute for the Act of 1923. The Act of 1923 is a Central Act and the Group Insurance is only scheme framed by the State Government giving some facilities to the employees and their dependents. In this case, admittedly, the employee did not avail any benefit under the Group Insurance Scheme and he has been awarded compensation of Rs.11,653/- with penalty of Rs.5,826/- by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. In view of the above reasons, I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.goyal/- SBCMA No.47/2009 Executive Engineer, Central Workshop Ground Water Department, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. TS Devani 4