L BEFORE THE HIG ECO. RT OF D ATURE A . ‘APPEnL-ANTS'? L , ‘ ‘ 1:. hr1 Harak lRam Sahu, / :/o Punauram Sahu,Caste T61 ‘Aged about rv— 52 years, S v-Englneer, ’Water Resources Su: D1v1s10n ondagaon, Bastar (C G ) . Sub D1V1s1ona1 Officer (Englneer) Wafer Resoxllrces Sub D1v1s1on - ,- ondagaon‘ Bastar (C G 7 K ) xecutwe Engmee E r ater Resoprces Sub 151v11on ~, agdalpur Bastar (C permtengimg Englnee I i VUS ERS ‘ I Dharmu Ram Netam, ' ‘ . . n S S 1, u I b— . ' ‘ ,W s ' “:J G) u r, " RESPONDENTS ,_ - '. jabout 53 years, Caste Gond XI—HC—78 WW,WW,W . macag [5g WWO§O‘ o.o.o.o.o..o.o..o m‘zoog Wm (W) maNm WWW WWW $5.1 9.2006 WW§WW ‘ éqmm Sh‘ri Akhii Agrawal, iearned P.L. for the State/appellants. The appeHants have’prefen'ed this appea£ under Section 3-0 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act {hereinafter referred to as ‘the Aot’) against passed by Commiseioner, Workmen’s the award dated 29.6.2006 Jagdaipur {0.6.} whereby the iearned Combensa’cion. Labour Court. Commiseicner aiiowing the appiication of the respondents, father and mother of ihe deceased workman nameiy Ratiram, being his dependants has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,50.96Q/— under Section 22‘of the Act. Head 0n admission. This appeal has been p'eferred by the appeilants on the foiiowing substantiat questicn of Iaw: ‘Whether the Court below has awarded the compensation correctly by calculating he income of the deceased to be Rs. 2330/- per momh where as the prevalent rate in'the particular project i.e. Stop Dam Construction at viliage Dharli was fixed at Rs. 58.83 per day?" XI—HC-78 . .m@.€.€2. mamW mw,m,m A?.é... ' aqzoo é Wm‘wiaai“) WWW wmm WW§WW ‘éawm " v appeilants submits that the impugned Learned counsel for the award has been passed by tl‘ e learned Tribunai by taking the month§y saiary of the deceased workrrl an Ratiram t0 be Rs. 2,330/- though the deceased was daiiy wager WO’kman and was paid wages at the rate of Rs. 58.83 per day being the prevailing wages at the relevant period for the workmen engaged in the con struction of the Stop Dam. it is futthet submitted that the above tindimg 'of the Tribuhai is without any evidence )sed substantial question of law ariseS for adjudication of this appeai. and therefore, the above prom i have heard learned co Jnsei for the appellants and have perused the impugned award. Learned Tribunal White i deceased at the time of deatl 3,00G/- per month - has r4 respondent Nor i herein) in t oath haestated that his son i though no certificate regarding record but from peruSai of the it the deceased is recorded as 2 3 years which remained unchallenged, the tecidihg issue No. 2 — whether age of the 1 was 20 years and he was earning Rs. aeorded a finding that applioant No. t is application as also in his statement on Nas aged 2O years at the time of death, age of the deceased has been brought on ostmortem report of EXP/7 wherein age of ;‘,k i XIPHC—78 mw,m,m mamm- WWW , mwm‘ age of the deceased has bee death. mWir'rwm 1 $af§nm »' WW .mza.£€2.(.‘?.€.. In 200 é Wmaaiawv Rim K/ 1 assessed las 2O years at the time of his So far as wages ofthe deceased that he was getting Rs. 100/" per asame finds support from the statements of tness namely Manuram. On the contrary, No. 1 heretn) and his witness Harilal have he labourers engaged in the construction of the rate of Rs. 58.93 per day. The learned issue has recorded a finding that the non- riuster roli or vouchers regarding salary of iering the monthiy salary of Rs. 2,330/~ of a Government of Chhattisgarh for the daily 'king in different Govt. Departments, has )fthe deceased at Rs. 2,33OI— and thereby at Rs. 2,50,960/-. The wages that the time of his death is a question of fact and the learned Tribunal to be Rs. 2,330/- and has been awarded by the impugned award question of law proposed by the appeliant dayas wages is concerned, thz applicant No. 1 as also his Wi non-appiicant No. 1 (appeiiant stated in their statements thatt Stop Dam were paid wages at Tribunal While dealing with this applicants have not 'filed the r the deceased and thus, consii unskilled labourers fixed by th-: paid employees/labourers wo assessed the monthly income i determined the compensation deceased was drawing at the the same has been decided by accordingly the compensation and therefore‘ the substantial XLHC—78 3am, W,W WW .i;\0..7&.€€2../.‘?.€.. WWRE‘W) 111200 é