Certificate Qua Payment Of Interest U/S 30(1)(aa) Workmen's Compensation Act Not Required If Employer Files Appeal Against Composite Award: J&K&L High Court

The appellant questioned the impugned award inter-alia on the grounds that learned ALC Doda had overlooked the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act and the rules framed thereunder and has passed the impugned award in violation of the principles of Sections 4, 5 & 10 of the Act.

Contesting the plea the counsel appearing for the respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present appeal contending that no appeal by an employer under Clause (a) could be preferred unless certificate of the Commissioner is filed along with the appeal to the effect that appellant had deposited the amount payable under the order assailed in the appeal.

Counsel for the respondent further argued that appellant was directed by ALC Doda to deposit the compensation along with interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of accident i.e. w.e.f 06.08.1998 within 30 days from the date of passing of the impugned award and since the appellant has deposited only the compensation amount and not the interest, therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable.

Adjudicating upon the matter Justice Sekhri observed that a bare perusal of the proviso to sec 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act clearly prescribes that no appeal by an employer under Clause (a) can be preferred unless the memorandum of appeal is accompanied by a certificate by the Commissioner that the appellant has deposited with him the amount payable under the order appealed against.

Expounding on clause (aa) inserted by the Amending Act of 1859, the bench explained that there has been no corresponding amendment in the third proviso with respect to an appeal under Clause (aa) that the amount of interest and penalty is also to be deposited with the Commissioner at the time of filing of the appeal.

"In my view, the corresponding amendment has not been introduced in the third proviso with the sole intention that the employer/appellant, at least is made to deposit the compensation amount in order to avoid and obviate the sufferings of an employee otherwise it would have been very easy for an employer to harass the employee first by preferring an appeal and then procrastinate the payment of even the compensation amount due to endless execution proceedings", the bench underscored.

Deliberating further on the issue the bench observed that therefore the appellant is required to deposit the amount of compensation, if an appeal is preferred against an order awarding as compensation a lump sum under Clause (a) of Section 30(1) of the Act and there is no such requirement in case of an appeal against an order awarding interest or penalty under Section 4(A) of the Act.

"It is manifest, as such, that deposit of the amount is required to be made of the compensation awarded under Clause (a) when an appeal is filed and there is no requirement to deposit the amount of interest or penalty under Clause (aa) of Section 30 (1) of the Act, even in case of a composite award awarding compensation under Section 30(1) (a) and Section 30(1)(aa) of the Act awarding the interest or penalty", the court maintained.

Buttressing the said position of law the bench found it worthwhile to record the observations of Orissa High Court in Ramakant Rout alias Routray Vs. Prafulla Kumar Dass and anr. 1993 wherein it was observed,

"A situation may arise, as in this case, where the award is composite being one under Section 30(1)(a) and Section 30(1)(aa) of the Act. In such a case, if the appellant confines himself to the imposition of penalty only, no certificate would be necessary. If, however, the entire award on both the grounds would be assailed, a certificate relating to the amount which is the compensation under Section 30(1)(a) of the Act would be required and no certificate for the amount of penalty would be necessary".

Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion the bench overruled the objection raised by learned counsel for the respondent and directed listing the appeal to be considered and decided on merits.

Case Title : Divisional Manager JKSFC Bhaderwah Vs Mohammad Sharief

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 209