Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Law Focus
SARFESI Act
3
Keeping in view the number of unemployed persons, at 14.6 million, and the unemployment rate, at
9.5 percent, which has more or less remained unchanged, certain measure that have been taken by
the US government to boost the economy, namely –
Law Focus
This week on law focus we will discuss and compare the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 with
the amended form, The Workmen Compensation Amendment Act 2009.
Comparative table of some of the provision of the old and the new act
Sr. No Provision of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 Amended Act of 2009
2 The 1923 Act does not define of who is an ―Employee‖ The Amended act has added
clause dd after clause d to
section 2, sub – section 1.
3 Section 4, Clause 1, Sub – Clause (a) ― Where the The Compensation has been
death results from an injury‖ Then, the employer has to increased from Rs 80,000 to
pay a sum of Rs. 80,000 to the workmen Rs 1, 20, 000.
Section 4, Clause 1, Sub – Clause (b) ―Where The Compensation under same
permanent total disablement results from injury‖ Then, head has been raised from Rs
an amount of Rs 90,000 is payable by the way of 90,000 to Rs 1, 40, 000
compensation by the employer to the workmen
4 As per Section 20, Sub – Section (1) – The State The Amended Act provides for
Government may, by notification in the Official that appointment of only those
Gazette appoint any person to be a Commissioner for members who have been a
Workmen’s Compensation for such area as may be member of a State Judicial
specified. Service for a period of not less
than five years or is or has
been for not less than five
years an advocate or a pleader
or is or has been a Gazetted
Officer for not less than five
years having educational
qualifications and experience
in personnel management,
human resource development
and industrial relations.
5 There is no provision which deals with ―Time limit for The Amended Act provides for
disposal of cases relating to compensation‖ in the old the same by Insertion of a new
act. section 25A after After section
25 of the principal Act,
namely:—
Time limit for disposal of cases
relating to compensation –
The Commissioner shall
dispose of the matter relating
to compensation under this Act
within a period of three
months from the date of
reference and intimate the
decision in respect thereof
within the said period to the
employee.‖
7
Comments
Let us begin with the Pro’s of this amended act. Firstly, the insertion of Section 25A for speedy
disposal of cases by setting a time limit is laudable, especially in country like ours where there is
heavy stagnation of cases. Secondly, by amending Section 4 (1) (a) & (b) the compensation now
available to workmen has increased significantly.
Now the Con’s, this particular act has complicated the existing setup. Firstly and most
importantly it has replaced/substituted the word ―Employee‖ for the prior existing ―Workmen‖
thereby changing the entire context. If one scrutinises the newly added Clause dd to Section 4, it
becomes unclear as to who is an ―Employee‖. The vague and stretched definition can be
interpreted without any strict construction and hence, defeats any progress that has been made
elsewhere in the act.