Unit 2 of Labour Law and Industrial Relations – II (syllabus: Module II — the Employee's Compensation Act 1923 and the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946: employee, employer, dependant and disablement, the employer's liability and its exceptions, computation, the Commissioner, and the nature, procedure and interpretation of standing orders). Below: what the unit covers, the provisions it turns on, and the cases an examiner expects you to name.
What this unit covers
- What must a claimant prove to make an employer liable under the Employees' Compensation Act?
- What is the doctrine of notional extension of the employer's premises?
- When is an employer not liable although the injury arose out of and in the course of employment?
- How is compensation computed, and why does the relevant factor fall with age?
- What is the difference between partial and total disablement, and between their temporary and permanent forms?
- Who is a dependant, and why must compensation for a death be deposited with the Commissioner?
- What is the legal nature of certified standing orders?
- How are standing orders certified, and what is the function of the Certifying Officer?
Treat that list as a self-test: recite each topic's rule from memory before you open its cases.
Provisions
- Employees' Compensation Act 1923, s. s. 3(1)
- Employees' Compensation Act 1923, s. s. 3(1) proviso
- Employees' Compensation Act 1923, s. s. 4
- Employees' Compensation Act 1923, s. ss. 2(1)(g), 2(1)(l)
- Employees' Compensation Act 1923, s. ss. 2(1)(d), 8
- Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946, s. ss. 4, 12, 13(2)
- Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946, s. ss. 3 to 9
Leading cases
- Saurashtra Salt Manufacturing Co. v. Bai Valu Raja
- Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Krishna Kant
Full case summaries
- Saurashtra Salt Manufacturing Co. v. Bai Valu Raja
- United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. (Smt.) Susheela
- Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Krishna Kant