Tara Kanwar vs State & Ors on 25 November, 2008
"9. In view of the aforesaid interpretation, that
Clause (vii) of Rule 27 applies to the cases akin to
any employee, suffering injury resulting in
permanent disability or death in the course of
employment as in the case of Workman
Compensation Act, the case of the petitioners for
the purpose of determining priority may be
examined in that light by the concerned Mining
Engineer/Assistant Mining Engineer as the case
may be on the facts of the case after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the applicant in whose
favour lease was sanctioned but the same has
been cancelled, before finally deciding their
application.''
Thus, applying the literal rule of interpretation, the
expression 'killed while on duty' in Rules 27(1) (vii) of the
Rules of 1986 could only be read as covering the cases where
the employee concerned, while on duty, gets killed for some
reason and not otherwise. Further, for the purport and
16
operation of the said Rule as explained by this Court in Budh
Mal's case, it is apparent that the same is intended only to
extend benefit to the dependents of the State Government
employees who have been killed while on duty and not for all
cases of the employees dying while on duty.