IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.396 of 2007 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Versus MOST.VARATI DEVI & ORS WITH MA No.397 of 2007 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., Versus DURGI YADAV & ANR ----------- 6. 18.4.2009 Heard Counsel for the Appellant in both the appeals. There can be now two views in the law that once a claim of a workman under Workmen’s Compensation Act is not admitted by the employer, the Deputy Labour Commissioner exercising power of Commissioner under Workmen Compensation Act has no option but to refer the matter to the Labour Court as he has no jurisdiction to decided the contested matter. From the reading of the impugned award, it is absolutely clear that the Deputy Labour Commissioner despite being made aware of such a contested claim went to pass the order awarding compensation in favour of workmen in both the appeals. This is not permissible as was held by this court on number of occasions including in the case of Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sajan Ram and another reported in 2007(2) PLJR 593, wherein this court after review of earlier decisions which setting aside similar award had held that : - “It is quite apparent that the matter was a contested 2 one and the impugned order was passed after hearing both the sides. It is also not in dispute that the impugned order was passed by Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Patna. 4. A decision of this Court in case of Most. Parmada Devi Vs. Sri Bishwanath Singh & Ors. reported in 2003(2) PLJR 722 has been referred. In the said decision, this court has specifically held that the Presiding Officer of the concerned Labour Court has been declared as the ex-officio Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation to deal with non- contested cases only arising under the Act and the rules framed thereunder, and he does not have jurisdiction to deal with the matters contested between the parties. It was also held in that decision that once such a contest was set up the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner Workmen Compensation was bound in law to refer the matter to the labour court having jurisdiction over the matter for adjudication. In the said case, reliance had also been placed upon the decisions of this Court in case of Messers Raj Kishan Co. Vs The State of Bihar & Others reported in 1999(1) PLJR 803 and also the decision of this court in case of Most. Bigal Devi Vs. Divisional Manager, Railway, Mugalsarai & Ors. in M.A. No. 108 of 2000 decided by judgment dated 2.8.2002. Learned counsel also refers the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Chanchala devi & Ors. in M.A. No. 445 of 2002, decided on 5.2.2007. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant Misc. Appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Patna is set aside and he is directed to refer the dispute to the Labour Court for proper adjudication on all the points.” That being so, this Court would also set aside the impugned awards in both the cases and would remit the matter back to the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner Workmen Compensation Magadh Division, Gaya with a direction to refer the dispute to the Labour Court for proper adjudication on all the points. The Labour Court on receipt of 3 such reference from the Deputy Labour Commissioner keeping in view that these two are old cases, would take all possible steps to conclude them and deliver the judgment within a period of six months from the date of receipt of such reference. Let it be however made clear that this court has expressed no opinion on the merits of the case of the parties. Both the appeals are accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. Narendra/ ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. )