LexRAJANNA versus UNION OF INDIA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A RAJ ANNA v. UNION OF INDIA APRIL 19, 1995 B [J.S. VERMA AND SUJATA V. MANOHAR, JJ.] Sen4ce Law: Ex-gratia payment to S.P.G. Personnel-Government Cir- cular regarding-Permanent panial disablement while on duty-Claim-entitled t&-Mealiing 'actual VIP security duty'-Notional Extension of actual duty- C Application of Principle of Workmen's Compensation Act.--Object of the Circular-To adopt a humane approach. D Words and Phrases : "actual VIP security duty", "in the course of employment''-Meaning of in the context of Service Law-Same meaning as under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The appellant, a security assistant in the SPG attached to the PM's office, suffered injuries while on his way to duty in an official SPG vthicle. Due to the injuries, the appellant suffered permanent partial disablement and therefore was unsuitable to perform VVIP's security duty. E The Appellaot's claim for ex-gratia payment was rejected by the Government as it was not covered by the circular. The Tribunal also rejected the appellant's claim. Hence, this appeal. Allowing the appeal, this Court F HELD : 1. The authorities concerned must adopt a human approach G and construe the circular in question liberally to advance its object instead of taking a rigid and pedantic stand. Unless properly implemented the scheme in the circular would be frustrated resulting in failure to achieve the avowed purpose. (533-FJ 2. It is well known that the Special Protection Group in the elite security force formed initially in 1985 of specially trained personnel to provide security cover to the P.M. of India and lately the Statute under which it was constituted has been amended to extend the provision of snch security cover also to the former Prime Ministers. In view of the high H quality of the personnel needed to constitute the SPG, some extra benefits 524 ' - y RAIANNA v. U.0.1. 525 are given to them for the much greater risk they take and the greater A danger to which they are exposed. This is the object or the circular in providing ex-gratia payment to the SPG personnel in the event or sustain- ing injuries. (528-E, F] 3. The modified circular enhances the rates and enlarges the extent or application thereon to the SPG personnel. The provision is made for payment for injuries sustained not only while performing "actual VIP Security duty" but also while performing duty "other than actual VIP security duty". This is the concept or the ex-gratia payment to SPG person- nel under the CIRCULAR SPG Trainee personnel are also covered under B the circular; he would be treated to be on duty "other than actual VIP C security duty", and for injuries sustained by him during the training period he would be covered and entitled to payment thereunder, though at a lesser rate. (528-G, H, 529-A, 529-C] 4. In the instant case, the appellant sustained injuries resulting in his permanent partial disablement in a motor accident when he was D travelling from the staff quarters to the South Block for duty in the official SPG vehicle meant for carrying the SPG personnel on dnty. The principle under the Workmen's Compensation Act for determining whether an accident arose out or and in the course of employment of the workman is equally applicable to the circular, as both have the same object. The E appellant was at a place on a point or an area which came within the theory of notional extension of the official premises for. performance of "actual VIP security duty". The official SPG Vehicle was a notional extension or the official premises and therefore the appellant was deemed to be on actual VIP security duty, while travelling in it from the staff quarters to the South Block. [529-E, F, G, 530-H, 531-A, BJ F Saurashtra Salt Manufacturing Co. v. Bai Valu Raja and Ors., AIR (1958) SC 881, applied. 5. There was a causal relationship between the accident and his employment in the SPG for actual VIP security duty and it was an incident G of the employment to travel rrom the staff quarters to the South Block in an official vehicle. Thus, the injury by accident arose in the "course of employment". The meaning or he expression "actual VIP security duty" is in consonance with the words" in the course of employment" in the Workmen's Compensation Act and therefore the test for determining the H 526 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995) 3 S.C.R. A liability for payment under the circular is the same. [533-D, E) Mookinnon
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.