Page 70 - DMGT306_MERCANTILE_LAWS_II

Unit 3: Rules regarding the Workmen’s Compensation Act

to further the statutory goal and not to frustrate it. In doing so, this court should make an Notes
effort to protect the rights of the weaker sections of society in view of the clear constitutional
mandate discussed above.” He further said that while awarding compensation under the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, factors such as disability, loss of income, pain and suffering, loss
of love and affection, loss of consortium, loss of damage to clothes and property and loss
of estate are considered whereas under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, disability
alone is considered for the purpose of calculating the loss of income.
Stressing the need to revamp the Workmen’s Compensation Act on a par with the Motor
Vehicles Act, he said “… an ‘injury’ sustained is always an ‘injury’ and the ‘pain’ suffered
is ‘pain’ with all elements and there cannot be any difference whether the victim gets relief
under either of the Acts”. Praising the judgment, A.K. Padmanabhan, president of the
Tamil Nadu unit of the CITU, said very rarely had a judgment of this type been awarded
by the Supreme Court or the High Courts. He described the High Court order and the
judgment of the two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court as “exceptional” and said he
hoped they would not continue to be exceptions for too long.
He said three years ago, in Chennai, the State unit of the CITU had submitted a
memorandum to the Chief Justice of India expressing concern over the Apex Court’s
decisions that had “consistently gone against the working class”. On the High Court order
calling for the removal of the ceiling on wages for calculating compensation, he said:
“This is one area where the government has been consistently taking a negative attitude
towards the demands of workers and trade unions.” He alleged that the government had
made changes in the various enactments on wages wherever it wanted to favour the
employers, but nothing of much use to the workers had been done in this regard. With
regard to pieces of legislations such as the Workmen’s Compensation Act and the Bonus
Act, the wage ceiling had not been amended for years, he said. Though it had been
continuously pointed out by trade unions in various tripartite meetings including the
Indian Labour Conference, the highest tripartite body in the country, that certain sections
of the Bonus Act had become obsolete, the wage limits prescribed for the application of
the bonus law remained, he added.
Pointing out that only recently the Union Cabinet decided to amend the Gratuity Act,
which put a ceiling on the maximum amount payable to workers, he said, these were only
a few examples to show how wage ceilings in the present inflationary situations took
away the meager amounts that workers were to get as a benefit or as compensation. At
least in the wake of the High Court’s judgment, he said, the government should come
forward to amend the Workmen’s Compensation Act on the lines of the Motor Vehicles
Act. Expressing similar sentiments, S.S. Thyagarajan, general secretary of the State unit of
the AITUC, said trade unions had always demanded that the government lift the ceiling
on the wages for all welfare schemes, including Provident Fund, Employees’ State Insurance,
and bonus. According to him, the judgment of the High Court “has a tinge of humanitarian
consideration”. He pointed out that the governments had always been reluctant to effect
an upward revision of wages that would benefit workers. Whenever amendments effected
an enhancement of wages, the increases became virtually redundant owing to belated
implementation, he said. “We hope the essence of the judgment will be taken into account
and wages will be enhanced appropriately to benefit workers and their families,” he said.
Question
Critically analyse the above case.

Source: //www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2707/stories/20100409270709800.htm

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 65