-^-^.-^---•..••-•'-- (1) IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A.(C)No. °\\0 of 2009 /.^ APPELLANT/ ^on-applicant No. 1 ^ Ranvir Singh Beck, S/o Shri Siril Beck, aged about 41 years, S.D.0. Irrigation Department, at present P.W.D., R/o Mahanadi Godavari Kachhar, Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^' ,^ ^"- ^" ^t/ 0^'W ^/^%7 V'W /^/ 3. <<^ ^- 5. Smt. Sushila Bai Thakur, aged about 35 years, W/o Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, Caste-Gond, Kumari Rupali Thakur, aged about 17 years, D/o Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, Caste-Gond, Kumari Pinki Thakur, aged about 14 years, D/o Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, Caste-Gond Kumari Urvashi Thakur, aged about 13 years, Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, Caste-Gond Kumari Soniya Thakur, aged about 10 years, Late Shatruhan Lal , Thakur, Caste-Gond, Kumari Reshma Thakur, aged about 8 years, D/o Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, Caste-Gond, Manish Kuinar Thakur, aged about 6 years, S/o Late .'-~?' (2) Shatrahan Caste-Gond Lal Thakur, 8. ^" 9. 10. Kumari Geetanjali Thakur, aged about 4 years, D/o Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, Caste-Gond, Dular Singh Thakur, aged about 75 years, S/o Late Gahiruram Smt. Sonsil Bai Thakur, aged about 70 years, W/o Shri Dular Singh Thakur, Above Sl. No. 2 to 8 Minor through guardian Smt. Sushila Bai Thakur, W/o Late Shatruhan Lal Thakur, All R/o Village-Sankari, P.0. Pairi, P.S.-Gundardehi, Tahsil-Gundardehi, District- Durg (C.G.) (All above are applicants) P.W.D. Irrigation Department, Through : ACDO (S.D.O.), PWD, Irrigation Department Bemetara, Durg (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through PWD (Irrigation) Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Respondent No. 11 & 12 are Non-applicant No. 2 &3 in Original case. APPEAL UNDER SECTIJON ^GTOF WORKMAN COMPENSATION ACT, 192^3 11. 12. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.A. fCl No. 910 of 2009 APPELLANT : Ranvir Singh Beck. NON-APPUCANTN0.1 RESPONDENTS Versus Smt. Sushila Bai Thakur and others. APPEAL UNDER SECTION 30 OF THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT. 1923 Dlvision Bench: Hon'ble Shri I.JVI. Quddusi & Hon'ble Shrs N.K. Aaarwal. JJ. Present: Shri Abhay Tiwari, counsel for the appeliant. Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General with Shri G.D. Vaswani, Government Advocate for the respondents no. 11 & 12. ORAL^RDER (Passed on 22nd day of September, 2010) Per f.SVI. Quddusi. J. Heard on i.A. No.03, appiicatjon for condonation of deiay in filjng the appeal. 2. On due consideration, the ground mentioned in the application, we are satisfied that the appellant has succeoded in expiaintng the cause of delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, the application is aliowed and the delay caused in filing the appeal js hereby condoned. 3. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finaily. 4. This appeal has been fiied against the award dated 21-11-2008 passed by Commissioner for Workmen's (Labour Court), Durg (for short 'the Commjssioner') in Case No. 88/W.C. Act Fatal/2006 (Fatal). 5. The appellant herein was posted as S.D.0. when the accident had teken pface and he was arrayed by name also atong with PWD, Irrigatjon Department and State of C.G, in the claim petition. Ex-parte award against respondents No. 11 & 12 herein (non-appjicants No. 2 & 3) has been passed holding the instant appetlant and respondents No. 11 & 12 are JosntSy and severafly responsible for making payment of award. ilii'l ^l. u' .?r 11.1 6. I^ to tnformthis^^rfcwhii^ theyintendtoflleth^appealopflot?^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 7. Shri Wrmy^^^t^^ for responctehte NoN^ & 1tw^ dept^Nd Ihe an|ount oy^mpens^on^^^ bel^preferrtngttie^nstantiipp^l^ Cc^pen^on a^, 1923 in as^^ under Qteiuse ^ ctf^i^orsi 3| s^ ;l:':\l-';<.-.;-^:;-i.;"':.:'^<^.^l'l-:l% app^a^ is ac»ompainieclby & ceri^e^ effect1^t1lhe&ppel|i^^^^h^ ynder'.the^orcter;appeale<l''aQalnst.',•''-•'';,.:• ^.' ^:: 1.. ; ':. : 1! • ••:;1:':, l.:; 1;' ^- 1; •,:.'11^; • 8/ VVGarenotimpr^ectl^theal^^ ytnay^riiTheawardl^syeenps^^ perscmal papacjty. tn his personal^^^^c^^ temiedas etnptoy^^^^^^^T^ no apj^ication in ca^ of the^^^a^ respon<dents No. 11 & 12 are in N^ ®^ptG^^^^^^^^ r^p<)n^il^ity to m^ tl^t»aym | .• 5 9. Hcwv^^t a ^©BUS^I^^W procee^ings vwre mjtt^e^ •respQnclents^'No. l.4'^^&^^2^:'lT^nr^i^ j:Dep^tm@nt 'ai^^.i^':|:!Sta^-ia^^^el^ ^thel^tr^ugn^^'w^N^hasf -:&een'ma{le.€^(»^,aQai!nstlhem.'^ '1:,:';11 ':::'::11':1' 10, If the diiver/eiriplCB^ ^ vehicle met with an accident, o^ pereonally responsible M^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ compensation. ltjsthet^pwsibility<rfth©S1^^^^ officiat C^I^K^ to nAake payrnent^^^^^^ petJtion.TheappeHarrtwasncrtlhe^ptoyerofftiedeeeas^ was the State and ite (^cers^^^L ther^re, the pergon holdlng the^^^p^ responslble per^alfyfor makihg paym^ the amount ofaward. 1 . 1^.<:':/;••:.:''''•'.''•-.'-'..:.:/1;..'•-' 11. ln vj^ of the albowy^ set ^de^t^ it imp<^e&theliN>itit^of1lTieappellaritNso^^a^ yrr^H. ^ 1 %.. >^<^s ^^^^.. ^'i^^i^jK BUB Kvr respondents No. 11 & 12 herein in ofRciaJ capadty, shall be responsibie formaking the payment of amount involved in the award. 12. In view of above, the appeal is disposed Q Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge