MACT made mistake in categorizing skilled mason as semi-skilled laborer under notification of Jharkhand minimum wage: Supreme Court improves the distinction

The Jharkhand High Court has corrected an error in the calculation of damages awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Bokaro, by assessing the income of the deceased, a mason, as that of a semi-skilled laborer, contrary to the classification in Jharkhand minimum wage notification.

Justice Subhash Chand, who presided over the case, noted, “the learned Tribunal has held that the deceased was a mason; but the income of the deceased was assessed as a semi-skilled laborer for the purpose of the Jharkhand Minimum Wage Notification with effect from October 1, 2019, the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The Govt. of Jharkhand vide Notification No. 2/MW-2071/2010 L&T-1836 has released the variable duration allowance for minimum wages with effect from October 1, 2019 as an accident had occurred on 27.12.2019. The total minimum wage of semi-skilled workers during the year 2019 was fixed by the Government of Jharkhand Rs. 7008.14/- per month and around the figures the income was estimated at 7,000/- per month.”

“In the Gazette notification, the mason is shown under the category of skilled worker and the minimum wage of a skilled worker, in this Gazette notification the monthly minimum wage is shown 9238/-. As such, the income of the deceased, which was assessed at Rs.7,000 by the learned tribunal, which considers the mason as a semi-skilled worker, is wrong and requires the same adjustment on the ground that Mason is the skilled worker.” Justice Chand added.

According to the factual matrix of the case, a fatal motorcycle accident occurred in 2019 in which the deceased, aged 35, died after being hit by a truck that was driven carelessly and rashly. The deceased was survived by his wife, children and parents, who had filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, demanding ₹30,00,500 as compensation. The deceased, a mason, notably earned ₹15,000 per month.

However, the Tribunal found that the deceased was a mason; but his income was assessed as a semi-skilled laborer for the purpose of the Jharkhand Minimum Wage Notification with effect from October 1, 2019 and the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.

The Tribunal thus passed the impugned award directing to pay Rs. 14,81,200/- as compensation to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs, aggrieved by the ruling on the quantum of compensation, filed a miscellaneous application in the Jharkhand High Court, alleging that a mason under the said notification is categorized as a skilled laborer, with a minimum monthly wage of ₹9,238. They argued that the Tribunal’s classification of the deceased as a semi-skilled laborer was incorrect and sought an increase in damages. They further submitted that the parents of the deceased had not received the amount on account of loss of consortium.

The High Court in its judgment also addressed the issue of parental and filial consortium. Referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd v Pranay Sethi (2017), the Supreme Court held that the deceased’s parents were entitled to ₹40,000 on this basis.

In addition, the Court applied the statutory 10% increase every three years for conventional compensation heads, allocating an additional ₹44,000 to parent and child consortia, taking into account a 10% increase due every three years.

The appeal was partly allowed with the award being changed to ₹18,62,400 for annual loss of dependency and ₹44,000 under the conventional head of parental consortium. The remainder of the Tribunal’s ruling remained unchanged.

Case title: Shakuntala Devi and Ors vs .M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr

LL citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 174

Click here to read the verdict