Which one of the following statements in the context of the Employees’

Which one of the following statements in the context of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 is correct?

The lump-sum or half-monthly payment payable under the Act may be assigned or charged or liable to pass on to any person other than the employee.
A notice of compensation may be entertained by the Commissioner, even if the notice of the accident was not provided when the accident occurred.
Any right to receive half-monthly payment can under no circumstances be redeemed by payment of a lump-sum of such amount.
The half-monthly payment payable under the Act may be reviewed by the Commissioner in case there is a change in the condition of the employee.
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2024
Let’s examine each statement in the context of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923:
– Statement A: Section 8(1) prohibits the assignment or charge of lump sums or half-monthly payments, or their passing to any person other than the employee or his dependents. So, the statement that it *may* be assigned or charged is incorrect.
– Statement B: Section 10 requires notice of the accident as soon as practicable and a claim within two years. However, the proviso to Section 10(1) allows the Commissioner to entertain a claim even if notice was not given in due time if the employer had knowledge of the accident or if failure was due to sufficient cause. Thus, it *may* be entertained. This statement is correct.
– Statement C: Section 7 allows for the redemption of half-monthly payments by a lump sum under certain circumstances determined by the Commissioner. Therefore, it *can* under certain circumstances be redeemed, contrary to the statement. This is incorrect.
– Statement D: Section 7 explicitly provides for the review of half-monthly payments by the Commissioner on the application of either the employer or employee, accompanied by a medical certificate indicating a change in the condition of the employee. This directly matches the statement. This is correct.

Both B and D are factually correct based on the provisions. However, typically in UPSC MCQs asking for ‘which one is correct’, only one option is intended as the best fit or most direct statement from the Act. Statement D describes a routine process (review of half-monthly payment based on changed condition) directly enabled by Section 7. Statement B describes an exception to a procedural requirement (timely notice) allowed under a proviso to Section 10, which is conditional on the Commissioner’s discretion based on specific facts (employer knowledge or sufficient cause). Statement D is a more general statement of a power available under the Act whenever the condition (change in employee’s state) is met, whereas B relies on specific circumstances to override a default rule. Therefore, D is the most likely intended correct answer as a direct statement of a power/procedure under the Act.

The question tests various aspects of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, including assignment of compensation, notice requirements, redemption of payments, and review of payments.
Section 8 deals with the distribution of compensation. Section 9 prohibits contracting out and assignment of compensation. Section 10 deals with notice and claim. Section 7 deals with the review of half-monthly payments.