Government Employee can Undertake Farming as Hobby in Leisure Time Says J&K HC

On Thursday, while partly allowing the appeal of a government employee, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that 'a government employee can carry out his agricultural pursuits in his leisure time with regard to his land.'

The appeal was filed by Anil Sharma for enhancement of compensation granted to him by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Jammu, by award dated 30.04.2010, and was heard by a single-judge bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal. The ground for the appeal was that the appellant had demonstrated the income of Rs 9,000 per month from his agricultural pursuits and had also shown that he was paying Rs 3,000 per month as salary to the tractor driver. Thus, the injuries sustained by him in the accident have caused a reduction in his agriculture income.

The appellant also stated that in the said accident, the motorcycle was destroyed completely, but the tribunal has not provided any compensation on this account. The appellant also examined P.W. Sohan Lal, who claimed that he was employed by the appellant as a driver and earns Rs 3,000 as a salary per month. During cross-examination, he stated that he does not award the appellant any receipt of Rs 3,000.

Amrit Sarin, the insurance company's counsel, claimed that the appellant was a government employee and should not be called an agriculturalist and that the appellant had not provided any proof of the damage caused to the motorcycle.

The Court while reviewing the award passed by the tribunal noted that the appellant was granted compensation of Rs 1,20,000 under the heads of pain and suffering, loss of life services and medical expenses only and no compensation was awarded under the head of loss of income.

Further after reviewing the claim petition submitted by the appellant before the Tribunal, the Court observed that in its claim petition, the appellant pleaded that, in addition to being a government employee, he is also an agriculturalist and driving the tractor himself and that now, due to the injuries caused by the accident, the appellant had to employ a driver to drive his tractor and had to pay him Rs. 5,000 on a monthly basis. Even in the testimony before the tribunal, he stated that he was not able to drive a tractor and carry on farming because of the accident.

While allowing the appeal partly, the Court ordered, "The objection raised by Mr Sarin that the government employee can’t be an agriculturalist and cannot carry out agricultural pursuits is difficult to consider as the government employee can carry out his agricultural pursuits in his leisure time with regard to his land. This Court, therefore, finds it necessary to award the appellant an amount of Rs 25,000 in total for the engagement of a driver's services to drive his tractor in connection with his agricultural pursuits. As far as the fact that no compensation for damage to the motorcycle has been given is concerned, there is absolutely no evidence, hence, no compensation can be awarded for damage to the motorcycle"