1 2025:CGHC:14185 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 66 of 2025 1. Kalawati Sahu W/o Late Narsingh Sahu Aged About 31 Years Caste Teli And Resident Of Village Khaira Chhote, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) (Plaintiffs) 2. Dharambeer Sahu S/o Late Narsingh Sahu Aged About 13 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Namely Kalawati Sahu (Petitioner No.1) Caste Teli And Resident Of Village Khaira Chhote, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 3. Taneesha Sahu D/o Late Narsingh Sahu Aged About 11 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Namely Kalawati Sahu (Petitioner No.1) Caste Teli And Resident Of Village Khaira Chhote, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4. Kapil Sahu S/o Late Narsingh Sahu Aged About 10 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Namely Kalawati Sahu (Petitioner No.1) Caste Teli And Resident Of Village Khaira Chhote, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Prakash Gupta S/o Shri Ramlal Gupta Aged About 45 Years R/o Raigarh Road Sarangarh, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) (Defendats) 2. Company Management Century/ Ultratech Cement Factory Baikunth, Police Station And Tahsil Tilda- Nevra, District Raipur (C.G.) Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.03.27 17:49:29 +0530 2 3. Branch Manager The New India Insurance Company Limited, Through Branch Manager Sarangarh Micro Office, Ground Floor, Near Krishi State Bank, Raigarh Road Sarangarh, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Shikhar Sharma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 25-03-2025 1) By way of this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Labour Court, Raigarh (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 21/E.C. Act/2023 dated 17.10.2024, whereby the application moved by the petitioners for transfer of compensation amount from Raipur to the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Labour Court, Raigarh has been rejected. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an application U/s 22 of the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 was moved before the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation Act, Labour Court, Raigarh for disbursement of compensation amount and the matter is still pending consideration. He further submits that the employer/respondent No. 2 has deposited the amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 10,08,846/- before the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation Act, Labour Court, Raipur through Bank Draft No. 003502 on 23.08.2023. He contends that an application was moved for the transfer of the said amount from the learned Labour Court, Raipur to the learned Labour Court Raigarh, which has been rejected assigning the reason that the petitioners may approach the learned 3 Labour Court, Raipur for the withdrawal of the said amount. He further contends that there was no reason or occasion for the employer to deposit the amount of compensation before the learned Labour Court, Raipur when the matter was pending consideration before the learned Labour Court, Raigarh. 3) Heard. 4) In the present case, an application U/s 22 of the Act, 1923 was moved by the petitioners, who are the wife and children of the deceased Narsingh Sahu, claiming therein compensation on account of his death before the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Labour Court, Raigarh. During the pendency of the application, the employer/respondents No. 1 and 2 deposited the amount of compensation before the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation Act, Labour Court, Raipur. The petitioners moved an application before the learned Court, Raigarh for the transfer of the said amount from Raipur to Raigarh but that application has been rejected. 5) It is very difficult to understand as to why the amount of compensation was deposited with the learned Labour Court, Raipur when the matter is pending consideration before the learned Labour Court, Raigarh. The Learned Labour Court, Raigarh failed to consider the fact that since no proceeding is pending or initiated before the Labour Court, Raipur, there was no reason to deposit the said amount at Raipur. 6) Taking into consideration the facts of the present case, in the opinion of this Court, the reason assigned by the learned Labour Court, Raigarh in the order dated 17.10.2024 is not sustainable in the eyes of the law and the same is hereby quashed. 4 7) As a result, the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation Act, Labour Court, Raipur is directed to transfer the amount deposited by the employer i.e. Rs. 10,08,846/- to the learned Commissioner for Employees Compensation Act, Labour Court, Raigarh in connection with Civil Suit No. 21/E.C. Act/2023 forthwith. 8) Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya