Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. Mr. A. Jahid, learned counsel appearing for the claimants/ respondents submits that indeed there appears to be a difference in the gross pay in respect of deceased in the three exhibits, which shows three different amount. However, he submits that Exhibit No.7, which clearly indicates the gross pay of the deceased as Rs.48,577/- (Rupees forty eight thousand five hundred seventy seven) only, the learned Tribunal has rightly accepted the same on being appropriately proved by the claimant. He further submits that the learned Tribunal has deducted Rs.2,833/- towards PF, Rs.5,000/- towards VPF, Rs.30/- towards CGIS-C, Rs.2,894/- towards Manager-L, Rs.581/- towards ELEC, Rs.119/- towards house rent, Rs.15/- towards water, Rs.208/- towards professional tax and Rs.3,565/- respectively. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation amount of Rs.58,19,206/- (Rupees fifty eight lakh nineteen thousand two hundred six) only, to the claimants (respondent Nos.1--4 herein).

14. The learned Tribunal has accepted the provisional salary certificate, exhibited as Exhibit No.7 and accepted the gross pay of the deceased as Rs.48,577/- (Rupees forty eight thousand five hundred seventy seven) only. Deduction of Rs.2,833/- towards PF, Rs.5,000/- towards VPF, Rs.30/- towards CGIS-C, Rs.2,894/- towards Manager-L, Rs.581/- towards ELEC, Rs.119/- towards house rent, Rs.15/- towards water, Rs.208/- towards professional tax and Rs.3,565/- respectively. Accordingly, held that the monthly salary of the deceased, after deducting Rs.208/- as professional tax, stands at Rs.48,369/- only and thus, the total annual salary of the deceased was Rs.5,80,428/- (Rupees five lakh eighty thousand four hundred twenty eight) only.