IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8039 of 2008 Between: Akula Suryanarayana @ Suri Babbu S/o.Narayana Sri Venkateswara Saw Mill, Gavaravaram, Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector andMagistrate, West Godavari District, Eluru. 2 The Commissioner for Workmen Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Eluru, West Godavari District. 3 Peddiboina Venkta Mohan @ Mohan Rao S/o.Veeraswamy Sri Venkateswara Saw Mill, Gavaravaram, Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari District. 4 Peddiboina Veeraswamy @ Swamiji Master S/o.not known to the petitioner. Sri Venkateswara Saw Mill, Gavaravaram, Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not initiating the proceedings under Section 5 of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890 against the 3rd and 4th respondent to recover an amount of Rs.1,18,042/- as per the order of the 2nd respondent dated 28.2.2005 in W.C.No.7 of 1997 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of provisions of the workmen Compensation Act, 1923 and consequently, direct the 1strespondent to initiate the Proceedings under Section 5 of Revenue Recovery Act, 1890 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner was employed with respondents 3 and 4 as a worker in Saw Mill. On 01.03.1996, he is said to have suffered an injury while in work and that the same has resulted in amputation of left hand. The petitioner filed W.C.No.7 of 1997 before the second respondent claiming compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (for short ‘the Act’). The second respondent passed an award, dated 28.02.2005, holding that the petitioner is entitled to be paid a sum of Rs.1,18,042/-, as compensation. The award is said to have become final. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 1 and 2 are not taking any steps for recovery of the amount covered by the award. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Labour and the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4. The Act and the Rules made thereunder prescribe the procedure not only for adjudication of the claims made under the Act, but also for implementation of the awards. The amount covered by an award is required to be recovered by applying the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890. Once the award passed in favour of the petitioner has become final, there cannot be any justification for respondents 1 and 2 in not taking necessary steps in accordance with law. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing respondents 1 and 2 to ensure that the award, dated 28.02.2005, passed in I.D.No.7 of 1997 is implemented and in force, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, duly following the prescribed procedure. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:30.06.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}