Despite being an armed unit of the Union, the Supreme Court has declared that members of the Railway Protection Unit (RPF) can be recognized as “workmen” and file claims for compensation for injuries sustained while on the job under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923.
An appeal brought by the commanding officer of the Railway Protection Special Force (RPSF), a division of the RPF, was dismissed by a panel of judges led by Justices BV Nagarathna and Manoj Misra. The appeal was brought in response to a 2016 Gujarat High Court ruling that upheld the compensation paid by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner to the family of a constable who died while on duty.
Two concerns were posed by Justice Misra, who wrote the decision on the panel’s behalf. One was whether an RPF constable could be considered a workman under the 1923 statute despite being a member of the Union’s military forces as a result of the 1957 Railway Protection Force Act.
The court discovered, “In our view, even though the RPF is declared an armed force of the Union, it becomes not the legislative goal to exclude its participants or their descendants from reimbursement under the 1923 Act or the Railways Act, 1989.”
The top court rejected the RPF’s argument that the deceased constable’s heirs could not maintain their compensation claim because he was a member of the Union’s armed forces and so could not be considered a worker under the 1923 statute.
It said that a person’s ability to seek compensation under the legislation was subject to the restriction that he was not permitted to pursue compensation for the same accident more than once.
According to the bench’s ruling dated September 26: “In the instant case, there is nothing to suggest that the respondent’s (wife of a constable) claim under the 1923 Act was made after receiving compensation for the same accident under any other Act or law.”
“We hold that the respondent’s claim under the 1923 Act is maintainable,” it read. The appeal is rejected because it is without merit.
The case involves a constable who joined the RPF on December 27, 2006 and passed away on April 23, 2008, while performing his job-related duties. The deceased was 25 years old and earning Rs. 8,000 per month in salary.
The Workmen Compensation Commissioner had ruled on the claim made by the constable’s widow that the accident that caused his death occurred while he was working and that because he was a “railway servant” under the terms of the Railways Act of 1989, he would be considered to be a workman.
The commissioner set the amount of compensation due to his heirs as Rs. 4.33 lakh and ordered that it be paid, together with 9% interest, within 30 days of the order’s date.
The deceased was not a worker and was not a member of the Union’s armed forces, and the RPF contested the order before the high court because the 1923 Act claim petition could not be maintained.
While upholding the commissioner’s order, the high court dismissed RPF’s appeal.
Team Profile
Latest entries
