Workers in construction over one storey in employees compensation act
ECONOMY & POLICY

Workers in construction over one storey in employees compensation act

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that individuals engaged in the construction, maintenance, repair, or demolition of buildings higher than one storey are considered employees under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923. The case involved the widow of a worker who fell from the third floor of a building while performing wall painting and repair tasks, sustaining fatal injuries. She sought compensation and interest under Section 3 of the Act from both the contractor who employed her husband and the building owner. However, the Employees Compensation Commissioner had rejected her claim, citing the absence of an employer-employee relationship. Challenging this decision, the appellant argued that the contractor had admitted to hiring the deceased, and this admission was accepted by the Commissioner, making the rejection of the claim erroneous. Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit referred to Section 2(dd) of the Act, which includes within its scope any person employed in a capacity described in Schedule II. Specifically, Para (viii) of Schedule II defines employees as those engaged in construction, maintenance, repair, or demolition work on buildings taller than one storey. The Court noted that the deceased, while performing work under employment, fell and suffered fatal injuries, qualifying him as an employee under the Act. It concluded that compensation was warranted and allowed the widow’s appeal. Case Title: Seema Devi v. Vimal Jain and Another [First Appeal From Order No. 1596 of 2022]. (Livelaw)

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that individuals engaged in the construction, maintenance, repair, or demolition of buildings higher than one storey are considered employees under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923. The case involved the widow of a worker who fell from the third floor of a building while performing wall painting and repair tasks, sustaining fatal injuries. She sought compensation and interest under Section 3 of the Act from both the contractor who employed her husband and the building owner. However, the Employees Compensation Commissioner had rejected her claim, citing the absence of an employer-employee relationship. Challenging this decision, the appellant argued that the contractor had admitted to hiring the deceased, and this admission was accepted by the Commissioner, making the rejection of the claim erroneous. Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit referred to Section 2(dd) of the Act, which includes within its scope any person employed in a capacity described in Schedule II. Specifically, Para (viii) of Schedule II defines employees as those engaged in construction, maintenance, repair, or demolition work on buildings taller than one storey. The Court noted that the deceased, while performing work under employment, fell and suffered fatal injuries, qualifying him as an employee under the Act. It concluded that compensation was warranted and allowed the widow’s appeal. Case Title: Seema Devi v. Vimal Jain and Another [First Appeal From Order No. 1596 of 2022]. (Livelaw)

Next Story
Resources

Schindler named among Forbes’ World’s Best Employers 2026

Schindler has been named among Forbes’ World’s Best Employers 2026, a global ranking recognising companies for their workplace environments.Compiled by Forbes in partnership with Statista, the ranking is based on independent employee feedback, including whether employees would recommend their organisation to friends and family.The company said the recognition reflected its focus on creating a workplace where employees can develop their expertise and build careers. ..

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

India needs an export-execution mindset: Vishesh Jain

Interview with Vishesh Jain, Founder & CEO, EximpleWhat gaps in India’s global trade ecosystem led you to build Eximple, and what problem did you see businesses struggling with most?Eximple came out of a problem that all three founders had seen from different choke points in the trade ecosystem. India has millions of MSMEs and manufacturers, and many of them can make products that are genuinely competitive on quality. Yet only a small fraction is able to build meaningful international businesses. In our experience, the gap is usually not manufacturing capability; it is the ability to exe..

Next Story
Building Material

Nuvoco reports 13.5% revenue growth in Q2 FY27

Nuvoco Vistas Corp. Ltd. reported consolidated revenue of Rs 27.9 billion for Q2 FY27, up 13.5% year on year. Cement sales volume rose 9% to 4.7 million tonnes (MMT), while EBITDA increased 11% to Rs 4.11 billion.The company said it began its cement operations in 2014 with a 2.3 MMT per annum (MMTPA) operation at Nimbol. It now aims to reach 35 MMTPA of cement capacity by FY28, nearly 15 times its initial capacity. Its portfolio spans cement, ready-mix concrete and modern building materials.On sustainability and cost efficiency, Nuvoco partnered with CleanMax for a 46.4 MW wind-solar hybrid re..

Advertisement

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get daily newsletters around different themes from Construction world.

STAY CONNECTED

Advertisement

SPECIAL OFFER
QR Code