A STUDY ON THE CONCEPT OF PARTIAL DISABLEMENT UNDER THE

EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION ACT 1923

6.5. LABOUR INDUSTRIAL LAW

Submitted by:

Jawamongla Yaden

SF0117022

III Year – VI Semester

Faculty-in-charge:

Ms. Kasturi Gakul

National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam

 Table of Contents

Table of Cases.............................................................................................................................i

Table of Statutes.........................................................................................................................i

Table of Abbreviations................................................................................................................i

Introduction................................................................................................................................1

Aim.............................................................................................................................................ii

Objectives...................................................................................................................................ii

Research Questions....................................................................................................................ii

Research Methodology..............................................................................................................ii

Review of Literature.................................................................................................................iii

Disablement under Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923....................................................2

Partial Disablement......................................................................................................3
Total Disablement........................................................................................................4

Amount of Compensation........................................................................................................8

Compensation in case of Permanent Total Disablement..........................................8

Compensation in case of Permanent Partial Disablement.......................................8
Compensation in case of Temporary Disablement whether Total or Partial.......10
Compensation payable to an employee in respect of accident occurred outside
India.............................................................................................................................11

Conclusion................................................................................................................................12

Bibliography..............................................................................................................................iv
Table of Cases:

1. Ball v. William Hunt

2. C. David v. G. C. Mishra
3. Calcutta Electric Supply Corpn. v. HC Das
4. Janardhan v. United Insurance Company Ltd
5. Lipton (India) Ltd. v. Gokul Chandra Mondal
6. Orissa State Electricity Board v, Kedar Charan Lenka
7. Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Shrinivas Sobata and another
8. Regional Provident Fund v. Deepak Kulkarni
9. Samir U. Parikh v. Sikander Zahiruddin
10. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sethu Madhavan
11. V. Jayraj v. T. P. Transport Corpn. Ltd

Table of Statutes:

1923 - Employees’ Compensation Act (Workmen’s Compensation Act)

1948 - Employees’ State Insurance Act

Table of Abbreviations:

1. AIR All India Reporter

2. ALD Andhra Legal Decision
3. Bom Bombay
4. Cal Calcutta
5. Co Company
6. Corpn Corporation
7. ed Edition
8. ESI Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948
9. Id Ibid
10. LLJ Labour Law Journal
11. LLR Labour Law Reporter
12. Ltd Limited

i
13. Mad Madras
14. No Number
15. Ori Orissa
16. SC Supreme Court
17. UKHL United Kingdom House of Lords
18. v Versus
19. viz Videlicet
20. Vol Volume
21 WCC Workers’ Compensation Commissioner

ii
Introduction:

The Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 extends to the whole of India. It came into force on
the first day of July, 1924. It is social security legislation. The Act imposes statutory liability
upon an employer to discharge his moral obligations towards employees when they
suffer from any physical disabilities or diseases, during the course of employment in
hazardous working conditions. The aim of the Act is to provide quick and cheaper disposal of
disputes relating to the compensation which is not possible in comparison to proceedings of
civil law. The Act also helps the dependants to get relieved from the hardships caused
due to
1
accidents.

The Act is applicable to mines, factories, plantations, transport establishments, construction

works, railways, ships, and circuses. It is, however, not applicable to members of
armed forces of Union, employees covered by ESI Act, 1948, casual workers and workers
2
employed otherwise than for employer’s trade or business.

The Act provides for payment of compensation to employees and their dependants in case of
injury and accident (including certain occupational diseases) arising out of and in the course
of employment and resulting in disablement or death. The amount of compensation to be paid
depends on the nature of the injury and the average monthly wages and age of the employee.
The minimum and maximum rates of compensation payable for death and disability
have been fixed and are subject to revision from time to time.

A Social Security Division has been set up under the Ministry of Labour and Employment,
which deals with framing of social security policy for the workers and implementation of the
various social security schemes. It is also responsible for enforcing this Act. The Act
is administered by the State Governments through Commissioners for
Workmen’s
Compensations.

1
Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. (April 23, 2020, 08:34 PM),
https://www.slideshare.net/shalusaraf/employees-compensation-act-1923-28871651.
2
Id.
1
Aim:

The aim of this project is to learn about the concept of ‘Partial Disablement’ under
the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 and to study in detail the types of disablement that
exist under the Act with reference to relevant case laws.

Objectives:

The objectives of this project are:

1. To learn about the concept of Partial Disablement under the Employees’

Compensation Act;
2. To study in detail the types of disablement under the Act with relevant case laws;
3. To learn about the amount of compensation that is given to the employees.

Research Questions:

1. What is disablement under the Employees’ Compensation Act?

2. What are the types of disablement under the Employees’ Compensation Act of 1923?
3. What is the amount of compensation that is given to employees in case of partial and
total disablement?

Research Methodology:

This project has been completed with the help of the Doctrinal research method. The research
work has been completed by completely depending on existing secondary sources and
materials found on the internet. This project is descriptive in nature. The mode of
th
citation used in this project is the 20 edition of Bluebook. This project is not exhaustive, but
can be
used for further reference and is thus, binding in this regard.

ii
Review of Literature:

3
Mishra , in his book, gives a detailed and comprehensive introduction to the subject
of Labour and Industrial Law. This book has helped the researcher in understanding the
concept of partial disablement under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. The
author has provided detailed explanations regarding the concept along with illustrations and
case laws and judicial decisions which has proved to be very useful for the researcher in the
completion of the project work.

4
Pandey , in his article, makes a comparative study between the Indian and English decisions
given in cases relating to compensable harm under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.
He comes to find that a compensable ‘personal injury’ rendering an employer liable
presupposes two essential conditions, viz.; (i) the accident should have arisen out of
the employment’ and (ii) it should have occurred in the course of the employment. He
explains the two conditions are so much interrelated that in many cases, if one condition is
found to be fulfilled, the other is assumed to also be fulfilled by the court. In his article, he
talks about the evolvement of judicial decisions where the element of time and place of
employment and the duty of the injured workman are considered to be important in
determining that the accident has taken place in the course of the employment. He also
focuses on the development and passage of the social security legislations and the
judicial decisions that ensure that the workmen who have suffered loss and injury due
to accidents in their workplace get the compensation that is owed to them.

5
Bhatia , in his article, conducts an empirical study of the administration of
Workmen’s Compensation Law in the states of Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab, especially
focusing on the administrative process for claims of compensation by the workmen. He
begins by explaining the duties of the agency of the Workmen’s Compensation
Commissioner (WCC), which is a quasi-judicial activity designed to ensure that justice is not
sacrificed at the altar of technicalities. In his article, he mainly focuses on the works and
duties of the WCC in these two states and thus, makes a detailed and descriptive
comparative study between the two
states.

3 th
S.N. Mishra, LABOUR AND INDUSTRIAL LAWS, Central Law Publication, 26 ed. 2011.
4
Kamta Prasad Pandey, Compensable Harm Under Workmen’s Compensation act, 1923-A Comparative Study
of the Indian and English Decisions; Journal of the Indian Law Institute; Vol. 11, No. 4, 1969.
5
K.L. Bhatia, Administrative Process for Compensation Claims An Empirical Study of Administration of
Workmen’s Compensation Law in States of Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab; Journal of the Indian Law
Institute; Vol. 26, No. 1/2, 1984.

iii
Disablement under Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923:

The expression “disablement” means loss of capacity to work or to move. Disablement which
reduces the earning capacity of an employee or injury caused to an employee by an accident
resulting in the loss of earning capacity is technically called disablement. In other words, a
6
person is incapacitated to work or to move as a consequence of an accident.

7
Disablement is classified into:

I. Total Disablement and

II. Partial Disablement.

This can further be classified as:

i. Temporary Disablement and

ii. Permanent Disablement.

Disablement, whether permanent or temporary, is said to be total when it capacitates

an employee for all work he was capable of doing at the time of the accident resulting in such
disablement.

In general, temporary disablement means disablement in doing normal work which lasts for a
temporary period. Temporary disablement is subdivided into:

i. Temporary Total Disablement: Where a workman is incapacitated to do

every work which he could do had he not been incapacitated. It lasts for a
temporary period.
ii. Temporary Partial Disablement: Where a workman’s earning capacity is reduced
in doing every work which he could do well before the accident. It lasts
for a temporary period.

As compared to the above, permanent disablement means disablement arising out of

the accident which lasts forever and is permanent in nature. It is subdivided into the
following:

i. Permanent Total Disablement: When an employee suffers an injury caused by an

accident specified in Part I of Schedule I of the Employees’ Compensation Act,

6
Disablement: Classification of Disablement (April 24, 2020, 06:22 PM),
https://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/11/disablement-classification-of.html.
2
7
Id.

3
 1923 or suffers from a combination of injuries specified in Part II of Schedule I
which reduces the earning capacity when totalled to 100% or more, such injury is
said to be permanent total disablement. In order to determine whether the injury is
permanent or temporary, the total effect of injury on the employment
opportunities of the employee concerned is the deciding criterion.
ii. Permanent Partial Disablement: Where the earning capacity of the employee
is reduced in every work which he could do well, it is known as permanent partial
disablement. It is permanent in nature. Every injury specified in Part II Schedule I
is deemed to be permanent partial disablement.

8
In the case of Ball v. William Hunt , an employee was blind in one eye. After sometime, he
suffered an employment injury making it necessary for him to remove the eyeball of
the injured eye. As a result of his impairment, he could not get employed although he
was physically capable of doing other jobs which he could do before the accident. It was held
that incapacity for work includes ‘liability to work’.

Partial Disablement:

According to Section 2 (1) (g) of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, “partial
disablement” means, where the disablement is of a temporary nature, such disablement
as reduces the earning capacity of a *[employee] in any employment in which he was engaged
at the time of the accident resulting in the disablement, and, where the disablement is of a
permanent nature, such disablement as reduces his earning capacity in every
employment which he was capable of undertaking at that time: provided that every injury
specified [in
9
Part II of Schedule I] shall be deemed to result in permanent partial disablement.

When an accident occurs and the employee sustains an injury resulting in the reduction of
earning capacity of that employee, it is known as disablement. If the employee faces a loss in
his earning capacity by the disablement merely in the particular employment in which he was
engaged at the time of his accident, it is known as partial disablement of temporary nature. On
the other hand, if the employee faces a loss in his earning capacity as a result of
disablement in every employment which he was capable of undertaking at the time of
the
accident, it is known as partial disablement of permanent nature.
8
(1912) UKHL 711.
9
Section 2 (1) (g), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
 10
In the case of Lipton (India) Ltd. v. Gokul Chandra Mondal , the respondent was the
workman in the wage group of Rs. 300-400 per month under Lipton (India) Ltd. he sustained
an injury in the left eye by the fall of iron particles with the consequent loss of vision because
of the accident in the course of employment. He filed an application before the Commissioner
claiming a sum of Rs. 3780 as compensation at the rate of 30% loss of his earning capacity.
The appellant denied permanent partial disablement because the workman remained disabled
only for 14 days and thereafter, he resumed his duties. The Commissioner, after considering
evidence adduced by both parties including medical evidence, came to the conclusion that the
workman has sustained permanent partial disability in the left eye and so, the workman was
entitled to compensation at the rate of 30% loss of his earning capacity as fixed by item No.
26 of Part II of Schedule I overruling the contention of the appellant that item 26 was not
applicable and that compensation was to be determined under Section 4 (1) (c) (ii)
and consequently, he directed payment to the workman by the appellant of the sum of Rs.
3780/-.

In the appeal, the High Court of Calcutta confirmed the view taken by the Commissioner and
observed that they were unable to accept the contention that unless there is a complete loss of
vision of one eye, item 26 is not attracted. There is nothing in item 26 which excludes partial
loss of vision. In welfare legislation, if any particular provision is capable of
two interpretations, the one that is more favourable to the persons for whose benefit
the legislation has been made should be adopted. There can be no doubt that partial loss of
vision of one eye comes within the purview of item 26.

11
In the case of Calcutta Electric Supply Corpn. v. HC Das , no compensation is granted for
any physical disability unless there was loss of earning capacity. It is only in the case
of scheduled injury that such loss is presumed. Where the injury is not scheduled injury, the
loss of earning capacity must be proved.

Total Disablement:

According to Section 2 (1) (g) of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923,

“total disablement” means such disablement, whether of a temporary or permanent
nature, as incapacitates a *[employee] for all work which he was capable of performing at the
time of
the accident resulting in such disablement:
10
(1982) ILLJ 255 Cal.
11
(1968) 2 LLJ 169.
Provided that permanent total disablement shall be deemed to result from every injury
specified in Part I of Schedule I or from any combination of injuries specified in Part
II thereof where the aggregate percentage of the loss of earning capacity, as specified in the
12
said Part II against those injuries, amounts to one hundred per cent or more.

Total disablement may be of two kinds:

i. Temporary Total Disablement:

In temporary total disablement, the earning capacity of a workman is lost for
a temporary period.
ii. Permanent Total Disablement:
In permanent total disablement, the earning capacity of a workman is lost forever
with regard to all work which he was capable of performing at the time of
the accident resulting in such disablement.

It has been expressly provided that in total disablement, 100% earning capacity is lost as a
result of any injury specified in Part I of Schedule I or as a result of two or more injuries
specified in Part II of Schedule I.

In determining the loss of earning capacity, the diminution or destruction of physical capacity
as disclosed by the medical evidence is to be taken into account. Then, the extent of
such diminution or destruction should be studied to understand how it must have
disabled the affected employee from performing the duties which a workman of his
class ordinarily performs. Medical evidence plays an important factor in the assessment
of loss of earning capacity. However, it depends on the Court to refer to the evidence
before it and decide
13
whether the workman has suffered partial or total disablement.

14
In the case of Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Shrinivas Sobata and another , the
Supreme Court observed that the expression ‘total disablement’ has been defined in Section 2
(1) (l) of the Act. It has not been disputed that the injury was of such a nature as to cause
permanent disablement to the respondent, and that the question for consideration is
whether the disablement incapacitated the respondent for all work which he was capable of
performing at the time of the accident. The Commissioner has examined the question
and recorded his
finding as follows:
12
Section 2 (1) (g), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
13
Regional Provident Fund v. Deepak Kulkarni, 2002 (1) ALD 829.
14
AIR 1976 SC 222.
“The injured workman in this case is carpenter by profession. By loss of the land hand above
the elbow, he has evidently been rendered unfit for the work of carpenter as the work
of carpentry cannot be done by one hand only.” The Court held this finding as reasonable and
correct.

15
In the case of V. Jayraj v. T. P. Transport Corpn. Ltd. , a conductor working in State owned
Transport Corporation lost his hearing capacity due to shock received by him in an accident in
the bus in which he was working. He claimed compensation under item 6 in Part I
of Schedule I of the Act. The Commissioner fixed the loss of earning capacity at 20%
even though the medical certificate showed that there is 100% sensorineural hearing loss on
right ear and 73.5% hearing loss on the left ear. Hence the appeal was filed under Section 30
of the Act.

It was held that the loss of earning capacity has to be calculated in term of permanent partial
disability which the workman has been subjected to. The fact that the workman is continued
in employment and gets old wages will not absolve the employer from paying
the compensation. The employer may continue him in the old post and give him old wages by
ways of grace, but that would not disentitle the employee to claim compensation. It
was observed that fixing of loss of earning capacity at 20% by the Commissioner
cannot be upheld. Having regard to the fact that the appellant had lost the hearing in the right
ear at
100% and the left ear at 73.5%, the loss of earning capacity could be fixed at 60%. Thus,
allowing the appeal, the amount of compensation was enhanced by the High Court.

16
In the case of Samir U. Parikh v. Sikander Zahiruddin , the question before the Court was
whether the Commissioner has power to assess the loss of earning capacity more than what is
provided in the Schedule against a particular injury. In this case, the Commissioner
determined the actual loss of earning capacity at 80% even though the Schedule fixed it at
40%. The Bombay High Court held that the percentage of the loss of earning capacity stated
against the injuries in Part II of Schedule I of the Act is only the minimum to be presumed in
each case and the applicant is entitled to prove that the loss of earning capacity is more than
the minimum so prescribed. The Commissioner is, therefore, empowered to come to his own
conclusion with regard to the loss of earning capacity in each case on the basis of
the
evidence led before him.
15
(1989) LLJ 38 (Mad).
16
(1984) II LLJ 90 (Bom).
 17
In the case of K. Janardhan v. United Insurance Company Ltd. , the appellant tank driver met
with an accident and was severely injured. His right leg was amputated up to the knee joint.
The Commissioner held it to be 100% disability and awarded compensation. In appeal based
on the opinion of the doctor, the High Court held it to be 65% disability. Relying upon the
ratio laid down in the judgement of Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Shrinivas Sabata and
18
another , the Apex Court held the appellant had suffered 100% disability and he was not in
the position to work as a driver.

17
2008 LLR 785 (SC).
18
Supra note 14.

7
Amount of Compensation:

Section 4 of the Act provides how the amount of compensation is to be computed. It provides
principles on which compensation is to be determined.

Compensation in case of Permanent Total Disablement:

19
Section 4 (1) (b) of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 states that “where permanent
total disablement results from the injury: an amount equal to sixty per cent of the monthly
wages of the injured *[employee] multiplied by the relevant factor; *[one lakh and twenty
thousand rupees], whichever is more.

Under the proviso, the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, has the
power to enhance the amount of compensation mentioned under the Act to be paid to
the employees.

Compensation in case of Permanent Partial Disablement:

20
Under the clauses (i) and (ii) of Section 4 (1) (c) of the Act , the amount of compensation to
be paid to the employees in cases of permanent partial disablement either caused by injuries
specified in Part II of Schedule I or caused by injuries other than specified in Schedule I has
been dealt with.

Where the permanent partial disablement results from the injury specified in Part II of
Schedule I, such percentage of the compensation which would have been payable in the case
of permanent total disablement as is specified therein as being the percentage of the loss of
earning capacity caused by that injury.

Where the permanent partial disablement results from the injury other than specified in
Schedule I, such percentage is compensation payable in the case of permanent total
disablement as is proportionate to the loss of earning capacity permanently caused by
the injury.

In order to find out the amount of compensation in cases of permanent partial disablement, it
would be necessary to calculate the amount of compensation in case of permanent
total disablement with reference to the age of the injured employee i.e., 60% of his monthly
wages
19
Section 4 (1) (b), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
20
Section 4 (1) (c), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.

8
multiplied by relevant factor as indicated in Schedule IV and then the amount so obtained
shall be determined in proportion to loss of earning capacity of the injured employee
21
as specified in Part II of the Schedule I in respect of injury in question.

22
Explanation I to Section 4 (1) (c) has been included to clarify situations where the workman
has suffered more injuries than one from the same accident. It provides that where
more injuries than one are caused by the same accident, the amount of compensation payable
under this head shall be aggregated but not so in any case as to exceed the amount which
would have been payable if permanent total disablement had resulted from the injuries. It
means that compensation in such a case shall not be more than what would have been payable
in the case of permanent total disablement.

23
Explanation II to Section 4 (1) (c) has been given in order to explain how to process the
assessment of loss of earning capacity in cases of permanent partial disablement caused by
injuries which are not specified in Schedule I. For the purpose of sub-clause (ii), the qualified
medical practitioner shall have due regard to the percentage of loss of earning
capacity in relation to different injuries specified in Schedule I.

24
In the case of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sethu Madhavan , the
Commissioner cannot disregard the assessment made by a qualified medical practitioner.
However, if he does not accept the certificate, he can refer the part to Medical Board for
expert opinion and report or to call a second medical expert.

25
In the case of C. David v. G. C. Mishra , it was held that while assessing compensation, the
Court has to see whether the earning capacity of the injured has been reduced in
every employment and not merely in particular employment in which he was engaged at the
26
time of the accident. That is why Section 4 (1) (c) (ii), Explanation II of the Act mandates
that in case of non-scheduled injury, the qualified medical practitioner while assessing the
loss of earning capacity shall have due regard to the percentage of loss of earning capacity in
relation
to different injuries specified in Schedule I.

21
Payment of Compensation For Industrial Injuries Under The Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (April 24,
2020, 08:53 PM), https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/66617/10/10_chapter%205.pdf.
22
Section 4 (1) (c), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
23
Id.
24
26 (1993) I LLJ 142.
Section 4 (1) (c) (ii), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.

9
25
(1997) II LLJ 844 (Ori).

26
Section 4 (1) (c) (ii), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.

9
 27
In the case of Orissa State Electricity Board v, Kedar Charan Lenka , the High Court
of Orissa explaining and distinguishing “loss of earning” and “loss of earning capacity”
observed that these two concepts have conceptual difference. In case there is no loss
of earning and there is continuance of engagement, reference to Section 4 (1) (c) (ii) of the
Act is necessary to appreciate the distinction. The plea of employers was that in case
of continuance of engagement and non-reduction in earning, compensation is not payable. The
Court observed that this plea cannot be accepted. In considering the loss of earning capacity in
case of permanent or partial disablement, the comparison between the wages drawn by the
workmen before and after the accident form his employer at the time of accident is
not a determinative factor. If that be so, the employer to tide over liability may offer a
temporary employment to the claimant workman to deprive the latter of his entitlement under
the Act. That would be against the legislative intent. The intent is to consider loss of earning
capacity in such cases and not the loss of earning.

Compensation in case of Temporary Disablement whether Total or Partial:

28
Section 4 (1) (d) of the Act states that “where temporary disablement, whether total
or partial, results from the injury: a half monthly payment of the sum equivalent to twenty-
five per cent of monthly wages of the *[employee], to be paid in accordance with the
provisions of sub-section (2).

29
Section 4 (2) lays down that the half monthly payment referred to in Section 4 (1) (d) shall
be payable on the sixteenth day

i) From the date of disablement where such disablement lasts for a period of 28 days
or more; or
ii) After the expiry of waiting period of 3 days from the date of disablement where
such disablement lasts for a period of less than 28 days; and thereafter half
monthly during the disablement or during a period of five years, whichever
is shorter.
30
The Proviso to the section states that :

27
(1997) II LLJ 1058 (Ori).
28
Section 4 (1) (d), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
29
Section 4 (2), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
30
Id.

10
 a. There shall be deducted from any lump sum or half-monthly payments to which the
workman is entitled the amount of any payment or allowance which the workman has
received from the employer by way of compensation during the period of disablement
prior to the receipt of such lump sum or of the first half-monthly payment, as the case
may be; and
b. No half-monthly payment shall in any case exceed the amount, if any, by which half
the amount of the monthly wages of the workman before the accident exceeds half the
amount of wages which he is earning after the accident.

Any payment or allowance which the workman has received from the employer towards his
medical treatment shall not be deemed to be a payment or allowance received by him by way
of compensation within the meaning of clause (a) of the proviso, so such amount shall not be
31
deducted from any lump sum or half monthly payments to which the employee is entitled.

32
Section 4 (2A) states that the employee shall be reimbursed the actual medical expenditure
incurred by him for treatment of injuries caused during the course of employment. Under this
sub-section, the amount is not mentioned as such because the amount may be ascertained by
bills and vouchers concerned.

33
Section 4 (3) states that on the ceasing of the disablement before the date on which
any half-monthly payment falls due there shall be payable in respect of that half-month
a sum proportionate to the duration of the disablement in that half-month.

Compensation payable to an employee in respect of accident occurred outside

India:

34
Section 4 (1A) of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section
(1), while fixing the amount of compensation payable to a workman in respect of an accident
occurred outside India, the Commissioner shall take into account the amount of
compensation, if any, awarded to such workman in accordance with the law of the country in
which the accident occurred and shall reduce the amount fixed by him by the amount
of
compensation awarded to the workman in accordance with the law of that country.

31
Supra note 29.
32
Section 4 (2A), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
33
Section 4 (3), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.
11
34
Section 4 (1A), Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.

12
Conclusion:

The Employees’ Compensation Act of 1923 has played a great role in giving citizens
the opportunity to earn his living free from the fear of economic and moral ruin
caused by injuries that he might or has sustained during his employment working at mines,
factories, plantations, transport establishments, construction works, railways, ships, and
circuses, etc., as mentioned under the said Act. The Constitution of India also affirms this
opportunity to the people in the form of social and economic justice, which needs to be
secured by peaceful social and legislative steps.

To provide socio-economic justice to the working citizens of the country, many legislative
steps had been taken up by the government. The enactment of the Employees’ Compensation
Act of 1923 was the first step towards social security in India. It provided for compensation to
the employees for any harm or injury that he sustained during the course of his
employment. This Act was followed by the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948
which provided for insurance benefit to the workers.

From the enactment of such legislations, it is evident that the physical, mental and emotional
damage that a person suffers due to injuries sustained during his employment is an important
matter which cannot be simply disregarded. People who sustain injuries during the course of
their employment suffer a lot and face harsh consequences due to his injuries and disabilities.
Therefore, the enactment of such legislations has created a situation where the employers are
careful of the working environment they create in order to ensure that the working
environment is safe for the employees and that unnecessary accidents do not occur and cause
loss or injury to the people employed.
Bibliography:

Books:
th
Mishra, S.N., LABOUR AND INDUSTRIAL LAWS, Central Law Publication, 26 ed.
2011.

Online Articles:

Pandey, Kamta Prasad., Compensable Harm Under Workmen’s Compensation act,

1923-A Comparative Study of the Indian and English Decisions; Journal of the Indian Law
Institute; Vol. 11, No. 4, 1969.
Thomason, Terry., Permanent Partial Disability in Workers’ Compensation: Probability and
Costs; The Journal of Risk and Insurance; Vol. 60, No. 4, 1993.

Durbin, David L., and Kish, Jennifer., Factors Affecting Permanent Partial Disability Ratings
in
Workers’ Compensation; The Journal of Risk and Insurance; Vol. 65, No. 1, 1998.

Bhatia, K.L., Administrative Process for Compensation Claims An Empirical Study of

Administration of Workmen’s Compensation Law in States of Jammu and Kashmir
and Punjab; Journal of the Indian Law Institute; Vol. 26, No. 1/2, 1984.

Online Sources:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43950044?seq=1

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43950893?seq=1

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41828639?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/66617/10/10_chapter%205.pdf

https://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/11/disablement-classification-of.html

https://www.slideshare.net/shalusaraf/employees-compensation-act-1923-28871651

http://www.helplinelaw.com/employment-criminal-and-labour/WOCA/workmens-
compensation-under-the-workmens-compensation-act-1923.html

iv