1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER SB Civil Writ Petition No.12657/2010 Kamlesh Sharma Versus Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Sawai Madhopur & ors 29.9.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr KC Sharma – for petitioner BY THE COURT: By this writ petition, a challenge has been made to the order passed by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation without maintaining an appeal as provided under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act (for short 'the Act'). Statutory alternative remedy exists which has not been availed of by petitioner. The only reason supplied is regarding condition of pre- deposit of the amount before maintaining an appeal. Such a ground, as raised, cannot be accepted. It is settled law that a condition of pre-deposit to maintain an appeal can be imposed. This is more so when Workmen's Compensation Act is a beneficial legislation for workmen. The other ground urged is in reference to the amended 2 Act of 2009. It is submitted that in view of amendment in section 20 of the Act, Commissioner with required qualification was not appointed after the amendment thus order passed by incompetent authority deserves to be set aside. I have considered aforesaid aspect also. Since a provision for appeal exists under the Act, petitioner is always free to take aforesaid plea while maintaining appeal thus any comment on aforesaid ground would be improper and may affect the parties either way. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, dismissal of this writ petition will not preclude petitioner to maintain an appeal under the provisions of the Act, if he is so aggrieved by the impugned order. (MN BHANDARI), J. bnsharma