[2025:RJ-JP:24112] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19755/2017 Shiv Charan Son Of Shri Johari, aged about 48 years, Resident Of Naktipura, Post Nadi Barkheda Garwa-Ki-Chowki, Tehsil And District Karauli Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus The Assistant Engineer, Government Of Rajasthan, Public Works Department, Sub Division, Karauli. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharad Joshi, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order 01/07/2025 This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner/workman (for short, ‘workman’) against the award dated 03.10.2017 passed by the learned Labour Court, Bharatpur (for brevity, ‘learned Labour Court’) in LCR No.672/2014 (876/1999) whereby, while answering the reference in favour of the workman, instead of reinstatement, he has been awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/-. Since, only the quantum of compensation is under challenge and there is no counter writ petition filed by the respondent assailing the findings of the learned Labour Court answering the reference in favour of the workman, facts in detail are not required to be referred. The only necessary and relevant fact for decision on the controversy involved is the period for which the workman has worked with the respondent which is from 01.09.1987 till 31.08.1988, i.e., one year. [2025:RJ-JP:24112] (2 of 3) [CW-19755/2017] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 31.07.2018 passed in the case of The Director, Tiger Project, Sariska, District Alwar vs. Labour Court and Another: D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.406/2018 and other connected matters, since, he has worked for a period of one year, he is entitled for a lump sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed in terms that the respondent be directed to pay him the lump sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. Although, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer; but, could not dispute that a Division Bench of this Court has held in the aforesaid case of the The Director, Tiger Project, Sariska (supra) that a workman, who has worked upto a period of one year, is entitled for a lump sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. In view of the aforesaid undisputed legal proposition, since, the workman has worked for a period of one year, he is found to be entitled for a lump sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- instead of Rs.30,000/-. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms that the petitioner/workman is held entitled for a lump sum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. The respondent shall pay him the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- after adjusting the compensation of Rs.30,000/- already awarded, if already paid, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order failing which the enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum and the officer(s) responsible for delay would bear the interest component. Rest of the award is maintained. [2025:RJ-JP:24112] (3 of 3) [CW-19755/2017] Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J DIKSHA /164