IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 512 of 2006 Uttaranchal Transport Corporation ...Appellant Versus Smt. Geeta Jugran & others ..Respondents Sri V.K. Bisht, senior Advocate, assisted by Sri V.K. Kaparwan, Advocate, for appellant. Sri B.P. Nautiyal, Advocate, for respondents no. 1 to 3. Sri S.K. Posti, Advocate, for respondents no. 5 & 6. Dated: May 8, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 30 of Workmen’s Compensation Act, has been preferred by appellant i.e. Uttaranchal Transport Corporation, against the judgment and award dated 26.06.2006, passed by Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Dehradun, in W.C.A. Case No. 24 of 2004, Smt. Geeta Jugran and others vs. Uttaranchal Transport Corporation and others. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner- Smt. Geeta Jygran filed claim petition before Workmen Compensation Commissioner for compensation in lieu of death of her husband Prem Chandra Jugran. Prem Chandra Jugran was employed as conductor over Bus No. UP-32T-1630 of Uttaranchal Transport Corporation. On 31.3.2004 the said Bus met with an accident due to collision with Tractor No. PB 20- 1894 and Prem Chandra Jugran sustained injuries and on 1.4.2004 during treatment in Mahant Indresh Charan Hospital, Dehradun Prem Chandra Jugran succumbed to injuries. According to the claimants the deceased Prem Chandra Jugran was 38 years of age and his monthly salary was Rs.6514/- at the time of accident. The opposite parties filed their written statement. Opposite parties no. 3 and 4, owner and driver of Tractor involved in the accident, have been absolved from liability to pay the compensation vide order dated 31.1.2005. The opposite party no. 1-Uttaranchal Transport Corporation filed its written statement admitting the factum of accident and death of Prem Chandra Jugran due to injuries sustained by him in accident. It has also been pleaded that the amount of compensation has been claimed excessively by the claimants. The learned Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner after having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record allowed the petition for a sum of Rs.3,62,740/- in favour of claimants, payable by opposite party no. 1-Uttaranchal Transport Corporation, along with an interest @ 6% per annum from the date of death of deceased-workman i.e. 1.4.2004 till the actual date of payment of compensation, within a period of 30 days from the date of judgment. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and award, the appellant/Uttaranchal Transport Corporation has filed the appeal before this Court. Heard Sri V.K. Bisht, senior Advocate, assisted by Sri V.K. Kaparvan, Advocate, for appellant, Sri B.P. Nautiyal, Advocate, for respondents no. 1 to 3, Sri S.K. Posti, Advocate, for respondents no. 5 & 6 and perused the record. The record reveals that claimant-Smt. Geeta Jugran has stated in the claim petition as well as in her statement before the court below that Prem Chandra Jugran Sati-deceased was employed as a conductor in the bus in question and on 31.4.2004 during the course of performance of his duty he died in an accident due to collision of Tractor No. P.V.020-1894 near Megh Chhappar P.S. Kotwali, District Saharanpur. The claimant has also filed High School Certificate of deceased which shows that date of birth of deceased is 26.3.1963. The claimants also filed pay certificate of deceased issued by Station Superintendent Uttaranchal Transport Corporation, Rural Depot, Dehradun which shows that total emoluments of deceased- Prem Chandra Jugran was Rs.6514/-. The opposite party/appellant did not adduce any evidence inspite of sufficient opportunity being given to it. The opposite parties have pleaded before the Workmen Compensation Commissioner that conductor-workman does not fall within the category of ‘workman’ mentioned in schedule given in section 2(1)(N) of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923. The Workmen Compensation Commissioner held that deceased-Prem Chandra Jugran comes within the category of ‘workman’ in view of decision of High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in the case reported in 2001 ACJ 1885, Andhra Pradesh State Transport Corporation versus Gurupa Anjama. The Workmen Compensation Commissioner after having considered the evidence adduced by claimant held that deceased-workman died in an accident on 31.3.2004 during the course of his employment and hence claimants/dependents of deceased are entitled to get compensation under the provisions of Workmen’s Compensation Act. I do not find any infirmity in the finding recorded by Workmen Compensation Commissioner in this regard. As far as amount of compensation to be awarded in favour of claimants is concerned, the Workmen Compensation Commissioner has held that according to salary certificate filed in the case the salary was Rs.6514/- per month and in view of the provisions of the Act the maximum limit of Rs.4000/- for the purpose of calculating the compensation was taken and in view of the schedule appended to the Act Rs.3,62,740/- as compensation was rightly calculated and I do not find any illegality in the method adopted by learned counsel. In view of above discussion, the appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and award dated 26.06.2006, passed by Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Dehradun, is hereby confirmed. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP