HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL A.O. NO. 229 OF 2004 1. Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd., Through its Chairman, Dehradun, 2. Executive Engineer, Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd., Electricity Distribution Divison Khand, Almora. ...........................Appellant. Versus. 1. Workmen Compensation Commissioner / Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kumaon Region, Haldwani, District – Nainital. 2. Gomli Devi, W/o late Prem Singh, R/o Village Ramella, Dugri, Post Lodh, District Almora. ...........Opp. Parties. Dated: 12.2.2008 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri N.S. Negi, counsel for the appellant and Sri Mohinder Singh Bisht holing the brief of Sri Gopal Narain, counsel for the respondent. 2. Present appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 3.6.2004 passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner in W.C.A., No. 3 of 1998 Smt. Gomli Devi Vs. U.P.S.E.B. (presently known as Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd.), Distribution Division, Almora and others, whereby the respondent no. 2 has been awarded a sum of Rs. 1,52,753.00 towards compensation along with interest @ 12% per annum. 3. Briefly stated, a claim petition wads filed by the claimant / respondent no. 1 being W.C.A., No. 3 of 1998 Smt. Gomli Devi Vs. U.P.S.E.B. (presently known as Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd.), Distribution Division, Almora and others stating therein that due to shot of current, the deceased who was working on a pillar of electricity died on 18.12.1986. At the time of accident, the deceased was 22 years of age and was drawing the salary to the extant of Rs. 1200/- per month. On account of the death of the deceased, the claimant has claimed a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards compensation along with interest 12% per annum. 4. The defendants / appellants have contested the claim by filing a written statement stating therein that he has never been an employee of the corporation. 5. Aforesaid claim petition was allowed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner by recording a finding that he was enrolled as a Muster Roll Employee. Claims tribunal has observed as under: oknh i{k }kjk ih0Mcyw&1 o ih0Mcyw&2 ds lk{; ls Hkh ;g Li"V gS fd e`rd Jh cgknqj flag izfroknh ds izfr"Bku esa e`R;q ds le; 5 o"kZ ls fu;ksftr FkkA ih0Mcyw0&1 }kjk izLrqr fd;s x;s lk{; esa izn’kZ d&1 o izn’kZ d&2 Ldwy yhfoax izek.k i= o ifjokj jftLVj dh udy izLrqr dh x;h gSa tks dze”: 11&9&69 o 7&5&63 vafdr gS rFkk iksLV ekVZe fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij vk;q 20 o"kZ fy[kh x;h gSA iksLV ekVZe fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij vafdr vk;q rFkk ifjokj jftLVj esa vafdr vk;q esa fof/k ekU; fu;ekuqlkj yxHkx nks o"kZ dh vUrj gS mDr izek.k i=ksa ds vk/kkj ij ih0Mcyw0&1 o ih0Mcyw&2 ds }kjk fn;s x;s c;kuksa ds foijhr gSA ifjokj jftLVj ds vk/kkj ij vafdr tUe frfFk 7&5&63 gS tks e`rd ds nq?kZVuk ds fnu 23 o"kZ 7 ekg gksrh gSa ftls {kfriwfrZ lax.kuk gsrq e`rd dh mez 24 o"kZ Lohdkj dh tkrh gSA oknh i{k ds lk{; ih0Mcyw0 1 o 2 }kjk e`rd dh cgknqj flag dh nq?kZVuk ds le; osru :i;k 1200@& izfrekg gksuk crk;k x;kA izfroknh i{k }kjk e`rd dk fu;kstu gh Lohdkj ugha fd;k x;k vkSj u gh eLVj jksy ds lEcU/k esa vfHkys[k gh izLrqr fd;k ftlls e`rd cgknqj flag dk osru fl) gks ldsA {kfriwfrZ lax.kuk gsrq nq?kZVuk dh vof/k esa U;wure osru vf/kfu;e 1948 ds vUrxZr ykxw U;ure osru dh nj dks vk/kkj cu;k tkuk fof/k leer gksxkA vr% e`rd Jh cgknqj flag dh e`R;q ds le; muds U;wure osru vf/kfu;e 1948 ds vuqlkj ml vof/k esa fu/kkZfjr :i;k 460@& vo/kkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA rn~uqlkj e`rd dh mez 24 o"kZ rFkk osru :i;k 460@& ¼rRle;&U;wure nks lkS vM+rkfyl :Ik;k½ vo/kkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA oknh }kjk C;kt dh Hkh ekax dh x;h gS D;ksafd izfroknh i{k dks nq?kZVuk ds fn0 18&12&86 ls 18&12&03 rd dh vof/k ds fy, 12 izfro okf"kZd nj ls lk/kkj.k C;ktr :i;k 102505+=00 ¼,d yk[k nks gtkj ikap lkS ikap :i;k½ ds Hkqxrku dk nkf;Ro izfroknh i{k dk vo/kkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA vr% izfroknh i{k vf/k’kklh vfHk;ark mRrjkapy ikoj dkjiksjs’ku vYeksM+k dks vkns’k fn;s tkrs gSA fd og bl vkns’k ikfjr gksus ds 30 fnu ds vUnj vo/kkfjr izfrdj dh /kujkf’k :i;k 50]24+8+=00 ¼ipkl gtkj nks lkS vM+rkyhl :i;½ rFkk C;kt dh /kujkf’k :i;k 102505=00 ¼,d yk[k nks gtkj ikap lkS gtkj ikap lkS :i;k½ bl izdkj dqy izfrdj /kujkf’k :i;k 1]52]753+=00 ¼,d yk[k ckmu gtkj lkr lkS frjsiu :i;k½ cSad MªkQ~V ds ek/;e ls bl U;k;ky; esa tek djasaA ;fn izfroknh }kjk mDr fu;r le; lhek ds vUnj mDr /kujkf’k tek djsaA ;fn izfroknh }kjk mDr fu;e le; lhek ds vUnj mDr /kujkf’k tek ugha dh tkrh gS rks mlds fo:) fu;ekuqlkj olwyh dk;Zokgh viukbZ tk;sxhA 6. In view of the above, I do not find any error or illegality in the aforesaid award granted by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner and the award deserves to be confirmed. 7. Consequently, A.O. is dismissed. No order as to costs. (Rajesh Tandon, J.) 12.2.2008 Rathour