( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (L). No. 4376 of 2020 …. 1. Md. Fatatruddin Ansari aged about 56 years, son of Late Etwari Ansari. 2. Shahnaj Khatoon aged about 52 years wife of Md. Fatatruddin Ansari Both resident of village- Pokhariya, P.O. Basbutiya, PS Palajori, District- Deoghar ……Petitioners Versus 1. Union of India through Officer Commanding 51 Road Construct Company, GREF, c/o Army Postal Office, PIN Code 930051. 2. The Executive Engineer (Civil) Officer Commanding 51 Road Construct Company, GREF, c/o Army Postal Office, PIN Code 930051. ..…Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Arbind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGC ------ C.A.V On 29.08.2024 Pronounced On 28.04.2025 This Writ Petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners (who are the old aged parents of deceased) for quashing the Award dated 30.05.2019 passed by Sri. Rajendra Bahadur Pal, Learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-cum- Commissioner Employees Compensation, Deoghar, in Case No. W.C. 19 of 2013 by which the learned Court below has dismissed the application filed by the petitioners for grant of compensation under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 for death of their son Harun Ansari on 03.09.2009 and for further direction to pay the appropriate compensation as per Section 4 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923. ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 2 2. Heard Mr. Arbind Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned CGC for the Union of India. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned Award dated 30.05.2019 passed by the learned Court below is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the petitioners had filed compensation case under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 before the Learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Deogarh and the same was registered as W.C. No. 19 of 2013. It is submitted that Harun Ansari who was the son of the petitioners and who was a labourer under 51 Road Construction Company (GREF) C/o 56 A.P.O bearing ICPL No. 19071 and had met with an accident while working at high altitude on 03.09.2009. It is further submitted that the deceased was admitted to SNM Hospital, Leh and died on 04.09.2009. It is submitted that one Rajiv Kumar Singh, AEE (Civil) 51 RCC (GREF) sent report on 05.09.2009 to the concerned police station at Leh for lodging the F.I.R with respect to the said labourer. It is further submitted that the respondents had merely sent Rs. 6,448/- as wages for the period 21.07.2009 to 20.09.2009 and thereafter refused to pay the required compensation. It is submitted that the petitioners were fully dependent upon the deceased for their livelihood and as per section 4 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 they are entitled to compensation. It is submitted that the respondents had filed their written statement denying the claim of the petitioners on the ground that the deceased was not in continuous employment for six (06) months and death occurred due to occupational disease. They had taken the plea that NOK (i.e. Next of Kin) of ICPL Code No. 19071 MAZ Late Harun ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 3 Ansari son of Md. Fataruddin Ansari of 51 RCC is not entitled for compensation. Since he had not completed continuous period of employment for six (06) months which is mandatory for payment of compensation for occupational disease included in Part ‘B’ of the Schedule-III of WCA-1923 (Noe ECA-1923). This unit has paid dued to the NOK of the deceased ICPL total amount of Rs. 12,608/- only. 4. It is submitted that the learned Presiding Officer failed to consider the documentary as well as the oral evidence of the petitioners and came to the conclusion the case of the petitioners come under the purview of the Section 3 (2) of the Employees Compensation Act and hence, the impugned Award may be set aside and this Writ Petition may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Union of India has submitted that the impugned Award passed by the learned Court below is fit and proper and no interference is required. It is submitted that the Union of India is not inclined to pay any compensation to the petitioners in the light of the provisions of Section 3 and 4 of the Employees Compensation Act. It is submitted the learned Court below has considered all the oral evidence of both the parties and the documents filed on record. It is submitted that death of the deceased namely Harun Ansari was not due to Cardio-Respiratory Arrest and he died natural death and had not died due to occupational disease. It is submitted that Code no. 19071 (late) ICPL MAZ Harun Ansari son of Md. Fataruddin Ansari was employed as casual paid labour 51 RCC Do-II No. 09 dated 22 June, 2009. That ICPL Code No. 19071 (Late) Harun Ansari did not meet with an accident rather he fell ill at Km 80 on DS-DBO road under 51 RCC (GREF) due to complain of ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 4 breathing problem and he reported same to his Mate Code No. 19059 Sayam Ansari. Considering the critical condition of the deceased Harun Ansari, he was immediately shifted to 846 AMIR located at HQ 51 RCC on the same day but he was facing breathing problem and artificial oxygen was given to him at 846 AMIR. He was further evacuated to SNM Hospital, Leh on 03 September, 2009. As per medical report/death certificate, Harun Ansari died at 03:35 hrs on 04 September, 2009 at SNM Hospital, Leh and the cause of death was due to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory failure” and Septicemia. It is further submitted that there is no order for allowing compensation under Workman Compensation Act, 1923, if the death has occurred due to an occupational disease like HAPO and the deceased had worked for less than six (6) months. It is submitted that as per Schedule-III Para B to Workmen’s Compensation Act-1923 (now ECA-1923) continuous period of employment is required for minimum six (06) months of service and whereas the period employment in respect of Late Harun Ansari s/o Md. Fataruddin Ansari is less than six (06) months and as such no compensation is entitled to NOK (i.e. Next of Kin) of the deceased. Hence the W.C Case No. 19/2013 is devoid of merit and hence, the impugned Award is fit and proper and this Writ Petition may be dismissed. 6. Perused the records of this case and considered the submissions of both the sides. 7. It appears that the petitioners are the old aged parents of the deceased namely Harun Ansari who had died due to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory failure” and Septicemia. It is also admitted by the Respondents ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 5 that the deceased namely Harun Ansari was working as a labourer in 51 RCC Do-II No. 09 (GREF) and while he was working he fell ill at Km 80 on DS-DBO road under 51 RCC (GREF) due to complain of breathing problem, he reported the same to his Mate Code No. 19059 Sayam Ansari. It is also admitted by the Respondent that the patient Harun Ansari was immediately shifted to 846 AMIR located at HQ 51 RCC on the same day. From the above, it is evident that when the death of the deceased Harun Ansari took place then he was doing job under 51 RCC (GREF). 8. It transpires that the petitioners had got examined four (04) witnesses in support of their case who are as follows :- (i) PW-1 is Laljan Mian, (ii) PW-2 is Imtiyaz Mian, (iii) PW-3 is Fataruddin Ansari (i.e. the father of deceased) and (iv) PW-4 is Shahnaz Khatoon (i.e. the mother of deceased). 9. The petitioners in support of their case got proved the following documents as the Exhibits:- (i) Exhibit-A-1 is Death Certificate of deceased Harun Ansari, (ii) Exhibit-A-2 is F.I.R by Rajeev Kumar Singh, AEE Civil, (iii) Exhibit-A-3 is No Objection Certificate, (iv) Exhibit-A-4 is Letter of the father of the deceased, (v) Exhibit-A-5 is the other information to father of the deceased regarding the consideration of claim by Higher Authorities, (vi) Exhibit-A-6 is the information in the line of A-4 and A-5, (vii) Exhibit-A-7 is the information regarding the denial of compensation, (viii) Exhibit-A-8 is the letter of account number and code number of nearest State Bank of India, ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 6 (ix) Exhibit-A-9 is the information to the father of the deceased regarding the denial of compensation, (x) Exhibit-A-10 is the letter of one Mondetta Chatterjee, (xi) Exhibit-A-11 is the forwarding of cash receipt and (xii) Exhibit-A-12 is the letter of EE Civil dated 29.10.2012 addressed the father of the deceased. 10. 10. On the other hand, one witness was examined on behalf of the Respondent- Union of India as follows:- (i) MW-1 is Kaushal Kumar Singh (i.e. Lower Division Clerk). 11. The Respondents in support of their case got proved the following documents as the Exhibits which are as follows:- (i) Exhibit-M-1 is the extract copy of papers showing date of recruitment of the deceased on 03.06.2019, (ii) Exhibit-M-2 is the extract copy of the discharge of the deceased on 04.09.2009, (iii) Exhibit-M-3 is the copy of A-1, (iv) Exhibit-M-4 is the copy of A-2, (v) Exhibit-M-5 is the copy of A-3 and (vi) Exhibit-M-6 is the copy of Government regarding Ex-gratia payment to labourers working in BRO dated 14.01.2009. 12. Thereafter, the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court had dismissed the claim application vide impugned Judgment dated 30.05.2019. 13. After having heard both the sides, it is evident that the deceased namely Harun Ansari was working with the Respondents as an employee and he got developed the occupational disease in course of his employment. It is sheer coincidence that the deceased could not get completed the employment period of six (06) months in the light of Section 3 (2) of Employees Compensation Act but Section 3 (2) of Employees Compensation Act mainly provides ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 7 compensation for temporary employees who are alive, the person who had died or remained the rider of Section 3 (2) will not apply. 14. Schedule-III Part-(C) (6) has been inserted to give compensation to the dependents of such employees who died while serving in the Government organizations serving at high risk zone. It is an admitted fact that the deceased (Harun Ansari) while doing job of Road Construction for serving the Nation and he was employed by the agency of Union of India and thus, Union of India is the Principal Employer of the Contractor/Agency which has provided employment to the deceased Harun Ansari. 15. Section 3 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 provides that the Employer shall be liable to pay compensation if personal injury is caused to an employee by accident arising out of and in course of his employment. 16. Section 4 provides for compensation under certain conditions which includes death, permanent total disablement, permanent partial disablement etc. 17. At this stage, it is relevant here to quote Schedule-III, Part (C) (6) which is as follows:- SCHEDULE III LIST OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES SI. No. Occupational Disease Employment (1) (2) (3) PART A 1. ………. …….. PART B 1. ………. ……. PART C ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 8 18. The above serial no. 6 of Schedule Part (c) was inserted by SO No. 2615 dated 15.09.1987. 19. It is further relevant to mention here Section 3 (2) of Employees Compensation Act which reads as follows:- “Section-3(2):- If a employee employed in any employment specified in Part A of Schedule III contracts any disease specified therein as an occupational disease peculiar to that employment, or if a employee whilst in the service of an employee in whose service he has been employed for a continuous period of not less than six (06) months (which period shall not include a period of service under any other employer in the same kind of employment) in any employment specified in Part B of Schedule III, contracts any disease is specified therein as an occupational disease peculiar to that employment, or if a employee whilst in the service of one or more employer in any employment specified in part C of the Schedule III for such continuous period as contracts any disease specified therein as an 1. Pneumoconioses caused by sclerogenic mineral dust (silicosis, anthraoosilicosis, asbestosis) and silico-tuberculosis provided that silicosis is an essential factor in causing the resultant incapacity or death. All work involving exposure to the risk concerned. 2. Bagassosis All work involving exposure to the risk concerned. 3. Bronchopulmonary diseases caused by cotton, flax hemp and sisal dust (Byssinosis). All work involving exposure to the risk concerned. 4. Extrinsic allergic alveelitis caused by the inhalation of organic dusts. All work involving exposure to the risk concerned. 5. Bronchopulmonary diseases caused by hard metals. All work involving exposure to the risk concerned. 6. Acute pulmonary oedema of high altitude. All work involving exposure to the risk concerned. ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 9 occupational disease peculiar to that employment, the contracting of the disease shall be deemed to be an injury by accident within the meaning of this Section and, unless the contrary is proved, the accident shall be deemed to have arisen out of, and in course of the employment: Provided that if it is proved- (a) That a employee whilst in the services of one or more employers in any employment specified in Part C of Schedule III has contracted a disease specified therein as an occupational disease peculiar to that employment during a continuous period which is less than the period specified under the sub-section for that employment, and (b) That the disease has arisen out of and in the course of the employment the contracting of such disease shall be deemed to be an injury by accident within the meaning of this section: Provided further that if it is proved that a employee who having served under any employer in any employment specified in Part B of Schedule III or who having served under one or more employers in any employment specified in Part C of that Schedule, for a continuous period specified under sub-section for that employment and he has after the cessation of such service contracted any disease specified in the said Part B or the said Part C, as the case may be, as an occupational disease peculiar to the employment and that such disease arose out of the employment, the contracting of the disease shall be deemed to be an inquiry by accident within the meaning of this section. 20. 20. From going through the evidence of PW-1 Laljan Mian, it is clear that he has supported the case of the petitioners and stated that the deceased was working at 51 Road Construction Company and 753 Border Road, T-Force at Leh Ladakh Labour having Code No. 19071and while doing job in course of his employment, he suffered with the breathing illness due to working at high altitude in high mountains and he was admitted to Army Hospital, Leh where he died on 04.09.2009. However, parents of the Workman were paid only the due labour charges of Rs. 6,448/- and ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 10 Rs. 1,908/- only. He stated that the deceased Harun Ansari was employed as a labour on monthly payment of Rs. 4,550/-. He also stated that the Employer Company had also informed the father of the deceased Harun Ansari that due to death of the deceased Harun Ansari during employment, the Company and the Officers of Army are considering for grant of compensation amount but till date, the opposite partis have not paid any compenation amount to the parents of the deceased Harun Ansari. This witness was discharged without cross examination. Thus, PW-1 has supported the case of the petitioners and the evidence of P.W-1 stands un-rebutted and un-controverted and no steps was taken by the opposite parties-respondents to recall the said P.W-1 for his cross-examination before the learned Labour Court-cum-Commissioner Employees Compensation. 21. PW-2 is Imtiyaz Mian, who has also supported the case of the petitioners and stated the that the deceased Harun Ansari was his co-villager and the present case has been instituted by his father and mother and the deceased was employed at 51 Road Construction Company and 753 Boarder Road, T Force at Leh Laddakh as a labourer and his Code Number was 19071. During course of employment, the deceased labourer Harun Ansari became ill and developed respiratory problem as the deceased Harun Ansari was working at high altitude for constructing the road of the Army and due to which he fell into the said illness and for which, he was hospitalized at Leh Hospital of the Army and where he died on 04.09.2009. 22. Thereafter, the Employment Company had written letter about the death of Harun Ansari i.e. the deceased to his father and the said Employer Company had paid the arrears of labour charges ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 11 of Rs. 6448/- and Rs. 1908/- to his father. The Employer Company had employed the deceased Harun Ansari on monthly payment of Rs. 4550/-. During cross-examination, he stated that deceased (Harun Ansari) was his cousin brother in relation of village and had died on 04.09.2009. He learnt from the letter about the death of the deceased. Thus, PW-2 has supported the case of the petitioners. 23. PW-3 is Fataruddin Ansari (father of the deceased) and stated that his son Harun Ansari was employed by 51 RCC in Road Construction Work for last three (03) months under the Respondents. However, the Respondents are showing his job for less than six (06) months. He further stated that his son Harun Ansari was not married and he and his wife are the only legal heirs to receive compensation. He asserted that no person would contract occupational disease for working in three (03) months only. He further asserted that his son was under employment of Respondents and he comes under the category of inter-state migrant labourer, who died at Leh, Jammu & Kashmir during the course of his employment and he had not received any compensation except few economic assistance. He claimed that his deceased son Harun Ansari was working in Road Construction Company in an open air and environment and there may not be possibility of any occupational disease because his son was not working in the dangerous category of the factory and his son was only employed for road construction. Even his son was living in the home provided by his Employer. He has further got proved Exhibit-A-1 to Exhibit-A-12 respectively. During cross-examination, he stated that he is aged 50 ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 12 years and above and have got six (06) children and his elder son Harun Ansari was aged about 18 years died in an accident and he learnt the said information from the phone and later on he had received the letter. However, he admitted that his son had died in the year 2009 whereas, he has filed this case in the year 2013. 24. Thus, from the scrutinizing the evidence of PW-3, it is evident that he has fully supported his case. 25. PW-4 is Shahnaz Khatoon (i.e. mother of the deceased) and stated the same facts as stated by the PW-3 and hence, the same is not been repeated here and she also stated that they should be granted compensation of Rs. 05,02,760/- (Rs. Five Lakh Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty). During cross-examination, she stated that she is not aware of the contents of this affidavit but she has put her signature. She denied the suggestion that his son Harun Ansari had worked only for less than six (06) months. Thus, PW-4 has also supported the case of the petitioners however, she is an illiterate lady. 26. So far as the evidence of Respondents is concerned, RW-1 is Kaushal Kumar Singh who was working as Lower Division Clerk in 51 RCC and stated during his evidence that he is working as the Lower Division Clerk in 51 RCC. He stated that the deceased Harun Ansari, Labour (deceased) was employed in 51 RCC since 03.06.2009 and when any labour joins then he was given Code number and the deceased was given Code No. 19071 in which it was written that from which date the labour had joined and the same has been maintained in file. He has proved the extract copy of file marked as Exhibit-M-1 (with objection). He further stated that when any labour dies then his ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 13 details are mentioned in the Register. Deceased Harun Ansari had died on 04.09.2009 and he further proved the extract copy in the same Register marked as Exhibit-M-2 (with objection). He also stated that the deceased Harun Ansari had complaint of “Pulmonary Oedema” and for which he has made complaint on 03.09.2009 to he MATE namely Sayam Ansari. Thereafter, his MATE informed to 846 (AMIR) and thereafter, he was shifted to SNM Hospital, Leh. However, deceased (Harun Ansari) had died on 04.09.2009. He has further proved the Death Certificate of the deceased Harun Ansari marked as Exhibit-M-3 (with objection). 27. He further proved the F.I.R lodged of S.H.O, Police Station, Leh regarding the death of deceased Harun Ansari marked as Exhibit-M-4 (with objection). He further proved the No Objection Certificate issued by the concerned police station which was marked as Exhibit-M-5 (with objection). He asserted that Harun Ansari (deceased) had worked only for three (3) months in 51 RCC and was getting monthly salary of Rs. 4500/- per month and his death was informed to his family members through the MATE. He further stated that the deceased Harun Ansari was getting Rs. 1150/- and Rs. 5000/- respectively and apart from this, he was given due labour charges of Rs. 4550/-and Rs. 1908/-. He further asserted that as the deceased labour had worked for less than six (6) months and hence, they have not given any compensation to the dependents. He further proved the letter relating to the rules of ex-gratia payments in eight (08) sheets, marked as Exhibi-M-6. He further asserted the labour had died due to disease and not due to any ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 14 accident. 28. During cross-examination, he stated that he has got no official written order for giving evidence in this case. He also admitted that he is doing official work only and he was not appointed in the field work. He further admitted that he has not been deputed for supervision of labour who are working in the field. He is neither in Official Cadre nor in Managerial Cadre. He is not aware of Inter- State Migrant Workman Act which applies to a labour who moves from one state to another state but he admitted that deceased Harun Ansari was from Jharkhand and he had gone to Jammu & Kashmir for doing labour work. He admitted that before appointing any labour his medical check-up is done and only after getting it correct, he is employed and given code number. He further admitted that all papers are prepared at the time of the admission of labour till accident or death by the office of GREF. However, representative of Labour Union of Labour were present at the time of preparation of papers. He stated that he has got no personal knowledge of this case. He further stated that as higher Officials had not given their consent and, hence, the amount of compensation has not been given to the deceased Harun Ansari or his dependents. 29. Thus, from scrutinizing the evidence of O.PW-1, it is evident that he is simply a Lower Division Clerk of GREF in Road Construction Company (RCC) and he never worked in the field and he is giving evidence at the instance of Higher Officials. He admitted for having no knowledge of Employees Compensation Act and Inter-State Migrant Workman Act and also not aware of the case of the deceased Harun Ansari. Thus, O.PW-1 is mere a ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 15 formal witness to prove the documents of the Union of India. 30. It further reveals that the death of the deceased Harun Ansari was informed to his family members through his MATE and not by any Army personnel or by any person of the Employer Company R.C.C. O.PW-1 has himself admitted that he is doing only official work and he has not been posted for the field work and he was also never deputed for supervising the field work of the labourers. Though, he has shown ignorance about the Inter- State Migrant Workman Act but he had admitted that the deceased labour came from Jharkhand State to work in Jammu and Kashmir. O.PW-1 had also admitted that initially medical check up of the labour was done before appointing him and only after found him medically fit, he was appointed and recruited in the job and code number was allocated to him. The labour used to live in the residence prepared by GREF and they used to go to work from their and returned to shelter. He also admitted that the residence work of the labourers are being taken in the supervision of GREF and all the labourers move and work in the group. He further admitted that prior to his death, during course of his stay, the deceased Harun Ansari never fell ill. He had shown ignorance about the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 and also about the occupational disease while any labour is working. O.PW-1 had also admitted in Para-35 of his deposition that though, he is not aware of special information in this case but in some special case, the GREF Officials used to sent letter to the concerned that in case of approval of higher officials, the compensation amount can be paid and in the present case, as the higher officials have not given the permission and hence, the compensation amount has not been paid to the family members of the deceased Harun Ansari. ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 16 31. Thus, from scrutinizing the evidence of O.PW-1, it is evident that this is the case of clear exploitation of labourers who are working under risk job on high altitude areas and suffering from various occupational diseases including (pulmonary oedema). It is evident that the Management i.e. Union of India and Executive Engineer (Civil) i.e. the Respondents have failed to show any document relating to entry of any labour in its office of GREF and only on the basis of evidence of O.PW-1 and communication made earlier marked as Exhibit-M-3, it is evident that the same is prepared only after death of the deceased and hence, the same is not relevant part. 32. It is further evident that neither any office bearer of RCC Company who was involved in the Road Construction at Leh, Laddakh area nor any Officers or personnels of Army had been examined in this case before the learned Labour Court-cum- Commissioner Employees Compensation, Deoghar rather the respondents have been examined one Kaushal Kumar Singh, who is simply a Lower Division Clerk (i.e. the L.D.C) and not aware of the technicalities of the case and has never worked in the field where the labourers used to work at high altitutde or at any places. Therefore, it is evident that the Management has failed to discharge its onus on the point of occupational disease of the deceased Harun Ansari. 33. It further transpires from the Lower Court Records that one Enquiry Committee was constituted and one Maj. Amarjit Singh was appointed as Enquiry Officer. 34. It appears that vide order dated 07.09.2009, One Sri A.K Dutta, EE(Civ), Officer commanding had instituted for one man enquiry and had appointed one Maj. Amarjit Singh (332 SPL/51 ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 17 RCC GREF) as Enquiry Officer to investigate into the cuase of incident and foul play, if any and also to recommend admissibility of compensation under W.C.A 1923, if any. 35. It reveals that three (03) persons namely M.D Hatim (Code No. 1970), MATE Sayam Ansari (Code No. 19059) and Nanak Chand were examined on behalf of the deceased who also stated that they were not aware of the exact cause of death and they had not been suspected any foul play and the deceased was not under the influence of any liquor or drugs. His MATE Sayam Ansari stated that he evacuated him to 51 RCC from where the deceased was referred to S.N.M. Hospital, Leh. Even one Nanak Chand of 846 AMIR/51 RCC from the Army was examined and stated that he had also not suspected foul play and the deceased was not under the influence of any liquor or drugs. 36. He further stated that he had provided artificial oxygen through cylinder and then the deceased Harun Ansari was referred to S.N.M Hospital, Leh. 37. It further reveals that there is finding of Court/Enquiry Officer who had came to the conclusion as follows:- (i) That while working at site on 03.09.2009 at about 10:00 Hours ICPL Code No. 19071, Maz. Harun Ansari S/o Md. Fatruddin Ansari complained of breathing problem and reported to his Mate Code No. 19059 Sayam Ansari. However, considering the critical condition of the Patient Code No. 19071 Maz Harun Ansari was immediately shifted to 846 AMIR located at HQ 51 RCC on the same day. Thereafter, the deceased Harun Ansari was facing breathing problems and artificial oxygen was given to him at 846 AMIR. Since, the condition of patient did not improve, so he was ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 18 further evacuated to S.N.M Hospital, Leh on the same day. On 04.09.2009 at 03:35 hrs Code No. 19071, Maz Harun Ansari, S/o Md Fatruddin Ansari expired at S.N.M Hospital, Leh. (ii) Thereafter, the matter was intimated to Police Station, Leh vide 51 RCC, Letter No. 2056/HA/03/E2 to lodge F.I.R and in turn Police Station, Leh issued no objection for burial of deceased at graveyard Leh. (iii) According to Medical Report/Death Certificate, the individual died at 03:35 hrs on 04.09.2009 and the cause of death was due to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory Failure” and Septicemia. (iv) The individual was on government bonafide duty at the time when he fell sick and consequently expired. (v) He was not under the influence of liquor or any other intoxicant at that time. (vi) As per statements of the witnesses and medial documents, it is revealed that no foul play and nobody is to be blamed for his demise. Opinion of Court/Enquiry Officer (i) ICPL Code No. 19071, Maz Harun Ansari, S/o Md. Fatruddin Ansari expired on 04.09.2009 at 0335 hrs due to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory Failure” and Septicemia. (ii) ICPL Code No. 19071, Maz Harun Ansari, S/O Md. Fatrudding Ansari expired due to HAPO (High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema) with Septicemia while working in high altitude area of HQ 51 RCC in Dett Km 80 on DS-DBO road under 51 RCC (GREF) sector. (iv) The cause of death can be attributed to the tough working condition prevailing in High Altitude ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 19 area and the deceased should be paid compensation under WCA 1923. However, the above document has not been exhibited. 38. It further reveals from the recommendation of OC 51 RCC (GREF) on one man inquiry proceeding and his recommendation are as follows:- (i) NOK of deceased to be paid all dues as applicable from CPL Welfare Fund. (ii) Individual completed three (03) months and one (01) day of service in 51 RCC at the time of his untimely demise. It is recommended for admissibility of compensation to his NOK and under the provisions of WCA 1923 be paid subject to approval by the competent authority. However, the above document has not been exhibited. 39. He had also agreed with the opinion of Enquiry Officer and one man enquiry and had found that according to Medical Report/Death Certificate, the deceased Harun Ansari had died at 03:35 Hrs on 04.09.2009 and the cause of death was due to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory Failure” and Septicemia. 40. From perusal of the Death Certificate of the deceased Harun Ansari, it is evident that he died due to “ Cardio Respiratory Arrest”, “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema” and “Septicemia”. 41. Even from the written statement filed by the Union of India before the learned Tribunal, it is evident that the respondents had admitted about the death of the deceased Harun Ansari due to complain of breathing problem and thus, the death of the deceased Harun Ansari due to breathing problem would also come under the purview of occupational disease as the deceased Harun Ansari was ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 20 employed by the respondents for working at high altitude and there is always possibility of breathing problem while working at high altitude. 42. It is an admitted fact that the respondents had hospitalized the deceased Harun Ansari in the hospital at 846 AMIR located at HQ 51 RCC due to breathing problem and then he was shifted to another hospital i.e. S.N.M Hospital, Leh on 03.09.2009. However, he died on 04.09.2009 at 03:35 hrs at S.N.M Hospital, Leh. 43. The question for consideration is that as to whether the family members of the deceased workman NOK (i.e.Next of Kin) of the deceased workman will be entitled to compensation under the provisions of Section 4 of the Employees compensation Act 1923 as the said workman has not completed the period of six (06) months of continuous service. The another question for consideration is as to whether the said period of six (06) months for working with respondents is mandatory for grant of compensation under Section 4 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 and the petitioners being parents can be denied compensation on account of pre-mature death of his sole bread earner. 44. It appears from the written statement filed by the respondents before the learned Court below and also from the documentary evidence that the deceased Harun Ansari had died due to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory Failure” and Septicemia. Thus, it is evident that apart from the problem of High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema, there is another disease “Septicemia” which shows that the workman had suffered some ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 21 injuries on his person also while working and due to which he fell prey to Septicemia due to failure on the part of medical treatment and also due to medical negligence. 45. It is further evident that the deceased Harun Ansari had contracted the disease of High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema which led to Cardio Respiratory Failure and also Septicemia. 46. Exhibit-M-1, M-2 and M-3 respectively have been marked (with objection) and the extract copies of the Register which is a secondary evidence and it can not be used as a primary evidence under provision of Section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act. 47. It is evident that the case of the petitioner will fall under Schedule-III, Part (C)(6), Serial No. 6 and hence, if the deceased employee Harun Ansari had not completed the continuous work of six (06) months even then his parents will be entitled to receive compensation under the provision of Section 3 (2) of Employees Compensation Act. While in service of an Employer and if an employee specified in Schedule-III, Part (C)(6) has contracted an occupational disease peculiar to that employment during continuous period which is less than the period specified under Sub-Section for that employment. It is clear that the occupational disease of the employee will be deemed to be an injury by accident within the meaning of this section. 48. Apart from the evidence of P.W-1, P.W-2 and P.W-3, namely Laljan Mian, Imtiyaz Mian and Fatatruddin Ansari respectively, it is also evident from the evidence of O.PW-1 namely Kaushal Kumar Singh that the deceased Harun Ansari had complaint of breathing illness due to working in high altitude in high mountains and had developed “Acute Pulmonary Oedema of ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 22 High Altitude” and which is involving exposure to high risk and thus, the parents of the deceased Harun Ansari will be entitled for compensation under of the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Employees Compensation Act. 49. Even the Army Officials have found that the deceased Harun Ansari was not taken any liquor and there is no foul play in his death and hence, in view of the above, it is evident that even if the deceased Harun Ansari had not worked for continuous period of six (06) months but still his parents will be entitled for compensation because the deceased Harun Ansari was working in high risk zone and his compensation cannot be denied on the ground of mere technicalities. It is not fault on the part of the deceased and while he died in employment of the respondents rather, it is working condition and environment of the area which has led to “High Altitude Pulmonary Oedema leading to Cardio Respiratory failure” as he was working in the high mountains. As per Schedule-III, Part-(C) (6) of Employees Compensation Act, the parents of the deceased Harun Ansari will be entitled to compensation as per provision of Employees Compensation Act. 50. Even, one Rajiv Kumar Singh, AEE (Civil) had lodged the F.I.R on 05th September 2009 after the death of deceased Harun Ansari on 04.09.2009 by intimating the S.H.O of Police Station, Leh that the deceased Harun Ansari has died due to Carido Respiratory Arrest, HAPO and Septicemia while undergoing treatment. 51. The Employees Compensation Act, 1923 is a beneficial piece of legislation and the object of the Act is to provide for the payment of compensation by certain classes of employer to their employees to compensation for injury by accident. The ( 2025:JHHC:14221 ) 23 development of High Pulmonary Oedema disease is to be treated as an accidental case and not to treat as a general Cardio Respiratory Failure otherwise, the object of the Act would frustrate the combined reading of Section-3 (2) of Employees Compensation Act. Schedule-III, Part-(C)(6) prescribes that if an employee contracts any occupational disease then, it will be treated to be an accident. 52. Therefore, this Court finds that Respondents have committed grave error by denying the claim of the Petitioners on account of death of deceased labour Harun Ansari who died on 04.09.2009 after suffering from Pulmonary Oedema on 03.09.2009 and he was admitted to Army Hospital, Leh where he developed (Septicemia) and it is also evident that the deceased labour (Harun Ansari) had died on 04.09.2009 due to occupational disease. 53. Under the circumstances, the order dated 30.05.2019 passed by Shri Rajendra Bahadur Pal, Learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-cum-Commissioner Employees Compensation, Deoghar, in Case No. W.C. 19 of 2013 is set-aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court- cum-Commissioner Employees Compensation to pass a fresh order and also to calculate the compensation amount in the light of Employees Compensation Act as provided under Section 4 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 with seven percent (7%) interest per annum till its realization. 54. Thus, W.P.(L) No. 4376 of 2020 is allowed with the observation mentioned above. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Avinash/-