Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Management of KSRTC, challenged the award dated 13.04.2016 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Mangalore in Application No.1/2012, directing payment of Rs.2,97,120/- with interest at 6% per annum to the respondent workman, K. Shivaram. The respondent was employed as a driver with KSRTC. On 03.03.2004, while driving a bus on the Bengaluru-Mangaluru route, he met with an accident and suffered injuries. A medical board certified on 10.01.2006 that due to the injuries, he could no longer work as a driver. The petitioner assigned him alternate light work and treated his absence from March 2004 to October 2005 as duty, paying full salary. The respondent also filed a motor accident claim petition in MVC.No.1067/2004. The Labour Court, on an application under Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, found that the respondent was incapacitated for his original post and that the petitioner had not provided suitable alternate employment. Instead of ordering reinstatement, the Labour Court awarded compensation computed under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, considering 100% loss of earning capacity. The High Court upheld the award, noting that the petitioner had admitted the respondent's unfitness for driving and had assigned light work, but the respondent was not satisfied with the nature of alternate work. The court held that once a workman is found unfit for his original post due to employment injury, the employer is bound to provide suitable alternate employment or pay compensation. The compensation awarded was found to be just and proper, and the petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2A - Compensation in lieu of reinstatement - Workman incapacitated for original post due to employment injury - Employer failed to provide alternate employment - Labour Court awarded compensation of Rs.2,97,120/- with 6% interest - Held that once workman is found unfit for original post, employer must provide suitable alternate employment or pay compensation; compensation awarded is just and proper (Paras 2-8). B) Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Section 4 - Computation of compensation - Workman suffered 100% loss of earning capacity - Labour Court computed compensation based on wages and age - Held that compensation computed as per Workmen's Compensation Act is appropriate when alternate employment not provided (Para 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court was justified in awarding compensation of Rs.2,97,120/- with interest at 6% per annum to the respondent workman instead of ordering reinstatement, given that the workman was incapacitated for his original post of driver due to employment injury and the employer failed to provide suitable alternate employment.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Labour Court award dated 13.04.2016 directing payment of Rs.2,97,120/- with interest at 6% per annum to the respondent workman.
Law Points
- Employer's obligation to provide alternate employment to workman incapacitated by employment injury
- Compensation in lieu of reinstatement when alternate employment not provided
- Section 2A of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Section 10(1A) of Industrial Disputes Act
- Workmen's Compensation Act
- 1923
