Madras High Court
CRP/4245/2026 of Ganesan Vs P.Selvam on 18 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.08.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No.4245 of 2026
& CMP.No.18511 of 2026
Ganesan
..Petitioner
Vs
P.Selvam
..Respondent
Prayer: Civil Revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 18.03.2023 passed by the Joint Commissioner for Employee Compensation, Salem, in W.C.O.P.No.124 of 2023.
For Petitioner:
Mr.O.Solaiappan
For Respondent:
No appearance
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This revision petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 18.03.2023 in W.C.O.P.No.124 of 2023 on the file of the Joint Commissioner for Employee Compensation, Salem.
2. The respondent, despite service of notice, has neither chosen to appear in person, nor through counsel. The Registry was also directed to print the name of the respondent in the cause list and even thereafter, considering that the respondent has been served recently, on 10.08.2026, I once again adjourned the matter to 18.08.2026 under the caption ‘for orders’. Even today, there is no representation on the side of the respondent. Hence, I have proceeded to hear the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.
3. I have Mr.O.Solaiappan, learned counsel for the revision petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would state that the respondent had filed W.C.O.P.No.124 of 2023, before the Joint Commissioner of Employee Compensation, Salem, alleging that he suffered an injury during the course of employment. The primordial ground of attack to the impugned proceedings awarding compensation is that the respondent has failed to produce any credible evidence to establish the existence of the employer and employee relationship with the petitioner in the first place. Relying on hospital records alone, the Joint Commissioner had not only entertained the compensation application, but also proceeded to allow the same.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also gone through the records.
6. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, excepting for hospital records, where there is a self serving disclosure that the respondent is an employee of the petitioner, there is no admitted or reliable documentary evidence, other than the said hospital records to establish that the respondent was an employee with the petitioner. Unfortunately, the Joint Commissioner has relied on the said hospital records alone to hold that the petitioner is the employer and therefore, he is liable to compensate. The said finding is clearly perverse and liable to be set aside.
7. The respondent has not been able to substantiate his employment with the petitioner and no acceptable piece of documentary evidence has been relied on or produced before the Joint Commissioner. In such view of the matter, when the very existence of employer and employee relationship has been denied and same also not having been proved by the respondent, the Joint Commissioner ought not to have proceeded to award compensation in favour of the respondent. For all the above reasons, I am inclined to allow the revision petition.
8. In fine, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order dated 18.03.2023 in W.C.O.P.No.124 of 2023 on the file of the Joint Commissioner for Employee Compensation, Salem, is set aside. No costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 18.08.2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ATA
P.B.BALAJI, J. ATA To The Joint Commissioner for Employee Compensation, Salem. CRP No.4245 of 2026 18.08.2026