DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING versus NAZIR AHMAD
Workmen's Compensation Act 1923 Sections 2 (1) N, 10, 32 and Schedule 11, CL1 and 2 Workwheel drilling operating bore for drilling machine for tube well `Whether a workman drilling. The machine neither lifts nor the vehicle drilling machine brings the truck driller to C1 (1) of the SHD II Play for easy transport, provided that the driller was covered in C1 (2) of SID II. There is no evidence that 10 or more people work in the premises where the manufacturing process took place and there is no evidence. As such evidence was retained, it was necessary to decide whether the driller was a worker or not, and whether the matter was within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner's Order of Commissioners, the appeal on the issue of compensation was set aside and the evidence was excluded. Opportunities were reversed after that decision. Parties
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
top advocates from Mangal Sada lawyer
