Eastern Railway vs Jhalia Devi

S.K. Katriar, J.—The Indian Railway is the appellant, and has by preferring this appeal engaged itself in a most frivolous and unwanted litigation. They are chasing a hapless widow whose husband died while on duty on March 29, 1995. He was engaged as a gangman and died while in harness at village Tori, district Palamu. The widow''s claim case under the Workmen''s Compensation Act was registered as W.C. 10 of 1997 Smt. Jhalia Devi v. Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway, Dhanbad, and the Workmen Claims Commissioner, Hazaribagh passed the impugned order dated July 22, 1998, wherein he came to the conclusion that the amount of compensation quantified at Rs. 67,796/- was deposited after a delay of one year and ten months. According to the impugned order the accident had taken place on March 29, 1995, resulting in the death of Deb Narayan, the husband of the respondent and the amount of compensation of Rs. 67,7961- has been deposited with the Workmen Claims Commissioner on March 11, 1997. There was thus a delay of a little less than two years in depositing the amount. By the impugned order, interest at the rate of 12% for the period April 29, 1995 to March 10, 1997 has been directed to be deposited till August 25, 1998 which has not till date been complied with.

While assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the provisions of Section 4A of the Workmen''s Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), as it stands today, provides that the Commissioner shall direct that the employer shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears, pay simple interest thereon at the rate of 12% or at such higher rate not exceeding the maximum of the lending rate of any Scheduled Bank. He submits that this amendment was enforced by Act 30 of 1995, w.e.f. September 15, 1995. In his submission, the accident took place on March 29, 1995, and therefore, the unamended provision will apply in the present case which was to the effect that interest at the rate of 6% shall be payable. Learned counsel was unable to advance any submission as to why the unamended provision be applied. The amendment being a beneficial legislation, why should not the same be applied in the present case which was in force on the date of the impugned judgment. Secondly, the appellant may be within the mischief of the second part of Section 4A(3) of the Act which is set out hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference:

"4-A. Compensation to be paid when due and penalty for default.-(1) Compensation u/s 4 shall be paid as soon as it falls due.

xxxxx xxxxx

(3) Where any employer is in default in paying the compensation due under this Act within one month from the date it fell due, the Commissioner may direct that, in addition to the amount of the arrears, simple interest at the rate of six per cent per annum on the amount due together with, if in the opinion of the Commissioner, there is no justification for delay, a further sum not exceeding fifty per cent of such amount, shall be recovered from the employer by way of penalty."

Learned counsel was unable to advance any argument at all with respect to the applicability or otherwise of the provisions of Section 4A(3) of the Act, and as to the justification for the delay in paying the awarded sum with interest, nor is there any material on record in justification of such delay in which case it is open to the Court to direct for payment of a further sum not exceeding fifty per cent of such amount by way of penalty.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present appeal is not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 30 of the Act which provides that no appeal of an employer in Clause (a) shall lie without a certificate by the Commissioner to the effect that the appellant has deposited with him the amount payable under appeal. He is, therefore, right in his submission that the present memorandum of appeal is not accompanied with the requisite certificate. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have deposited only the amount of compensation quantified at Rs. 67,796/- and has not deposited the interest to be paid by the impugned order. In that view of the matter, the appeal is not maintainable. The totality of the picture presents an extremely callous state of affairs. A widow who has been left high and dry in life at a young age, and has been chased up to the High Court for a small amount, namely, the differential amount of interest on Rs. 67,796/- for the period April 29, 1995 to March 10, 1997 and, furthermore, conveniently overlooking the second part of Section 4A(3) of the Act and discussed herein above. The authorities on behalf of the appellant will be well advised to do self-introspection and assess the differential amount payable by way of interest as per the impugned order on the one hand, and the cumulative effect of pursuing a trivial litigation to the harassment to its ownself, the harassment done to the widow, and the damage done to the Judicature by passing on a most unwanted litigation, on the other. It is this kind of most unwanted litigations that is bringing about the near-collapse like situation of the Judicature in India. The two-fold conclusion of a research , work of law in India is that Government or Governmental agencies are parties to seventy per cent of the litigations in this country, and they are passing on their decision-making to Courts on account of inaction, etc., all of which belong to the category of mala fides. This Court records its strongest condemnation of the Indian Railways for such an irresponsible and callous act.

In the result, this appeal is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 25,000/-. The Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway Dhanbad, is hereby directed to pay the amount of interest and costs to the respondent directly within a period of two months.

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Railway Minister, Government of India, New Delhi, for his information and corrective action with respect to its litigations. He should direct an inquiry fixing the responsibility for institution of the present appeal from whose pocket (s) the aforesaid sum of Rs. 25,000/-shall be realised, apart from any action that is found fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case against the responsible persons.

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Law Minister of India, for his information that such frivolous and most unwanted litigations constitute an important factor for the staggering arrears in Indian Courts.