In a landmark ruling that reinforces protections for India’s working class, the Supreme Court has held that employees injured or killed while commuting to or from their workplace may be eligible for compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. This applies if a clear connection exists between the accident and the employment.
The decision, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and K V Viswanathan, came in the case of Davishala & Ors vs Oriental Insurance Company. The Court interpreted the phrase “accident arising out of and in the course of his employment” in Section 3 of the Act to include reasonable commutes — a significant expansion of the compensation law’s scope.
The case centred on Shahu Sampatrao Jadhavar, a watchman employed at a sugar factory, who was fatally injured in a road accident five kilometres from his workplace while travelling on his motorcycle for his 3 am shift on 22 April, 2003. His family — including his widow, four children, and mother — had filed for compensation under the EC Act.
While the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner had awarded the family Rs 3.26 lakh with interest, the Bombay High Court had overturned the decision, reasoning that the accident occurred before the employee entered the premises of work and thus fell outside the purview of the Act. The apex court, however, disagreed and restored the original compensation, pointing to a clear connection between the nature of employment and the timing of the commute.
The ruling emphasised that factual context — such as odd-hour reporting times and travel necessitated by the job — strengthens the link between an accident and the employment, making such cases eligible for compensation. The bench noted that earlier judgments were divided on the issue, and this clarification aims to remove ambiguities.
In reaching its decision, the Court drew from Section 51E of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, which explicitly deems commuting accidents as arising out of and in the course of employment — provided there is a link in terms of time, place and circumstances.
The Supreme Court reiterated that the EC Act is a beneficial piece of legislation, meant to shield workers and their families from the economic consequences of employment-related injuries and fatalities. It held that compensation laws must be interpreted liberally to support the underlying objective of labour protection.
The ruling is likely to have significant ramifications for employees engaged in shift work, factory jobs, or roles requiring early or late reporting hours.
