Economic and Social Development

31. In which of the following cases will an employer be held liable to pay

In which of the following cases will an employer be held liable to pay compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923?

Subscribe on YouTube
  • 1. Where a personal injury is caused to an employee by an accident arising out of his employment
  • 2. Where the injury caused results in total disablement for two days
  • 3. Where the personal injury to the employee is caused in the course of his employment

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

1 and 2 only
2 and 3 only
1 and 3 only
1, 2 and 3
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2024
Download PDFAttempt Online
Section 3 of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 outlines the employer’s liability. An employer is liable to pay compensation if personal injury is caused to an employee *by accident* arising *out of and in the course of his employment*.
– Statement 1 describes injury caused by an accident arising *out of* his employment.
– Statement 3 describes injury caused in the course of his employment.
Both ‘arising out of’ and ‘in the course of’ employment are required conditions under Section 3. Thus, statements 1 and 3 together (or representing the components of the requirement) lead to liability (assuming an accident occurred and resulted in the required level of disablement/death).
– Statement 2 mentions injury resulting in total disablement for two days. Section 3(1) contains a proviso that states the employer shall not be liable for compensation in respect of any injury which does not result in the total or partial disablement of the employee for a period exceeding three days. Since two days is less than three days, statement 2 describes a scenario where the employer is *not* liable for temporary disablement compensation.
Therefore, conditions leading to liability are represented by statements 1 and 3 (jointly), while statement 2 represents a case where liability for temporary disablement does not arise.
The question tests the core conditions for employer’s liability to pay compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, specifically the ‘arising out of and in the course of employment’ principle and the minimum duration of disablement for temporary injuries.
The phrase “arising out of and in the course of his employment” is a crucial concept in workers’ compensation law, requiring a causal connection between the employment and the accident (‘arising out of’) and that the accident occurred while the employee was performing duties within the period and scope of employment (‘in the course of’).

Join Our Telegram Channel

32. Which of the following are included in total risk management? 1. Saf

Which of the following are included in total risk management?

Join Our Telegram Channel
  • 1. Safety
  • 2. Fire prevention
  • 3. Damage control
  • 4. Insurance functions

Select the correct answer using the code given below.

Subscribe on YouTube
1, 2 and 3 only
3 and 4 only
1, 2 and 4 only
1, 2, 3 and 4
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2024
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is D) 1, 2, 3 and 4. Total risk management is a comprehensive process that includes identifying, assessing, controlling, and monitoring risks that could affect an organization’s ability to achieve its objectives. This encompasses a wide range of potential threats, including safety hazards, property damage (like fire), operational disruptions, and financial losses.
A holistic approach to risk management considers all potential sources of risk. Safety and fire prevention are crucial aspects of preventing incidents. Damage control deals with mitigating the impact of incidents when they occur. Insurance functions are a key financial tool for transferring the risk of loss. All these components contribute to managing the total risk exposure of an entity.
Total risk management frameworks, such as Enterprise Risk Management (ERM), aim to integrate risk assessment and management across all levels and functions of an organization. It goes beyond traditional insurable risks to include strategic, operational, financial, and compliance risks. Therefore, safety, fire prevention, damage control, and insurance are all integral parts of a comprehensive risk management strategy.

33. The term “employee” under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 does not in

The term “employee” under Employees Compensation Act, 1923 does not include :

Subscribe on YouTube
A captain or other member of the crew of an aircraft
A person recruited as driver, helper, cleaner in connection with a motor vehicle
Any person working in the capacity of a member of the Armed Forces
A person recruited for work abroad by a company
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2023
Download PDFAttempt Online
The Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (formerly known as the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923) applies to employees in certain hazardous employments. Section 2(1)(dd) read with Schedule II defines who is included as an ’employee’. However, certain categories are typically excluded. Members of the Armed Forces of the Union are generally excluded from the purview of civilian labour laws, including the Employees Compensation Act, as they are governed by their own specific service rules and acts.
– The Act provides for compensation to employees and their dependants in case of injury or death arising out of and in the course of employment.
– Certain categories of persons are explicitly excluded from the definition of ’employee’ under the Act.
– Members of the Armed Forces are a common exclusion from such civilian labour laws.
Persons covered under the Act include those engaged in factories, mines, plantations, construction work, motor transport undertakings, aircraft crew, seamen, etc., as listed in Schedule II. The Act does not apply to employees covered by the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948.

Join Our Telegram Channel

34. Which one of the following pairs of term and meaning is not correctl

Which one of the following pairs of term and meaning is not correctly matched ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Lockout : Temporary closing of a place of employment
Lay off : Failure, inability, refusal of employer to give employment
Suspension : Termination of service of workman as a result of non-renewal of contract of employment
Closure : Permanent closing down of a place of employment or part thereof
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2023
Download PDFAttempt Online
Suspension, in the context of labour law, typically refers to a temporary removal of an employee from duty, often as a disciplinary measure pending an inquiry or as a punishment. Termination of service as a result of non-renewal of a contract of employment is generally distinct from suspension; it is simply the cessation of the employment relationship upon the expiry or non-renewal of the fixed-term contract, or potentially considered retrenchment depending on the specific circumstances and law. The provided definition for Suspension is therefore incorrect.
– Lockout: Temporary closing of workplace by employer (correct definition).
– Lay off: Employer’s inability/refusal to give employment due to specific reasons like shortage of material, power, etc. (correct definition).
– Suspension: Temporary removal from duty (incorrectly defined in option C).
– Closure: Permanent closing down of workplace (correct definition).
These terms are defined and regulated under various labour laws in India, such as the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Understanding the precise legal definitions is crucial for interpreting labour relations and disputes.

Subscribe on YouTube

35. Which one of the following is not an authority appointed/constituted

Which one of the following is not an authority appointed/constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ?

Subscribe on YouTube
Conciliation Officer
Board of Conciliation
Registrar
Works Committee
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2023
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is C. A ‘Registrar’ is not typically an authority appointed or constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, provides for various authorities for the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes. These include Conciliation Officers (Section 4), Boards of Conciliation (Section 5), Courts of Inquiry (Section 6), Labour Courts (Section 7), Industrial Tribunals (Section 7A), National Industrial Tribunals (Section 7B), and Works Committees (Section 3). A Registrar, such as a Registrar of Trade Unions (under the Trade Unions Act, 1926) or a Registrar of Companies, has functions related to registration and regulation of bodies, but is not an authority constituted under the ID Act for the purpose of resolving industrial disputes.
Works Committees are constituted in industrial establishments employing 100 or more workmen and consist of representatives of employers and workmen, aiming at promoting good relations and resolving issues at the shop floor level. Conciliation Officers and Boards of Conciliation are involved in mediating and assisting parties in reaching a settlement. Labour Courts and Tribunals adjudicate disputes when conciliation fails.

Join Our Telegram Channel

36. A Tribunal under Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme may, at any time, w

A Tribunal under Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme may, at any time, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it, within a period of :

Join Our Telegram Channel
three years from the date of its order
five years from the date of its order
two years from the date of its order
one year from the date of its order
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2023
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is C. A Tribunal under the EPF Act can amend an order to rectify a mistake apparent from the record within a period of two years from the date of its order.
Section 7L(2) of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, specifically provides that the Tribunal may amend any order passed by it, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, within two years from the date of the order.
This provision allows for correction of clerical or arithmetical errors or other mistakes that are obvious on the face of the record, without requiring a full review or appeal, thereby ensuring accuracy in the tribunal’s orders.

Subscribe on YouTube

37. Under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,

Under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, an employee who is the member of Pension Scheme is said to reach the age of superannuation when such employee attains the age of :

Subscribe on YouTube
55 years
58 years
60 years
62 years
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2023
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is B, as an employee who is a member of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995 (under the EPF Act) is considered to reach the age of superannuation at 58 years for pension purposes.
Under the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995, the normal superannuation age for eligibility for a regular monthly pension is 58 years. Employees can take early pension from age 50, but with a reduced benefit, provided they meet other eligibility criteria.
The Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, provides for Provident Fund, Pension Scheme, and Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme for employees in organized sectors. The Employees’ Pension Scheme (EPS), 1995, replaced the earlier Family Pension Scheme and introduced provisions for member pensions based on service and average salary.

Join Our Telegram Channel

38. After framing of the Pension Scheme under the Employees’ Provident Fun

After framing of the Pension Scheme under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, a pension fund shall be established as soon as possible. The establishment of the Pension Fund shall lead to cessation of which of the following ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
Employees' Pension Scheme
Employees' Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme
Family Pension Scheme
None of the above
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2023
Download PDFAttempt Online
The correct option is C. Upon the establishment of the Employees’ Pension Fund under the 1995 Scheme, the existing Family Pension Scheme ceased to operate.
The Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995, was introduced to replace the Employees’ Family Pension Scheme, 1971. All assets and liabilities of the Family Pension Fund were transferred to the new Pension Fund, and the Family Pension Scheme consequently ceased to exist.
The Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance (EDLI) Scheme is a separate scheme under the EPF Act, providing life insurance cover. It was not replaced by the Employees’ Pension Scheme. The Employees’ Provident Fund itself also continues to exist alongside the Pension Scheme.

Subscribe on YouTube

39. When is the employer not liable for payment of compensation to an empl

When is the employer not liable for payment of compensation to an employee ?

Subscribe on YouTube
If personal injury is caused to an employee during the course of his employment
If the employee has contracted a disease specified as an occupational disease peculiar to that employment
If the injury resulting in partial disablement was caused by accident that happened due to the wilful disobedience of the employee to an order expressly given for the purpose of securing the safety of the employees
In respect of any injury which resulted in the partial disablement of the employee during the course of employment for more than three days
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2022
Download PDFAttempt Online
An employer is generally not liable for payment of compensation if the injury, not resulting in death or permanent total disablement, was caused by an accident directly attributable to the wilful disobedience of the employee to an order expressly given for the purpose of securing the safety of the employee. Option C describes this scenario where the employer is not liable.
Section 3(1) of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 (formerly Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923) makes the employer liable for personal injury caused to an employee by accident arising out of and in the course of employment. However, the proviso to Section 3(1) lists exceptions where the employer is *not* liable. Clause (b)(iii) of this proviso states that the employer shall not be liable in respect of any injury, not resulting in death or permanent total disablement, caused by an accident which is directly attributable to the wilful disobedience of the employee to an order expressly given for the purpose of securing the safety of the employee. Option C fits this exception as it specifies partial disablement, meaning it didn’t result in death or permanent total disablement, allowing the exception for wilful disobedience to apply.
Option A describes the general rule of liability under Section 3(1). Option B refers to occupational diseases covered under Section 3(2) read with Schedule III, which also create employer liability. Option D describes disablement for more than three days, which is the condition that makes the employer liable; the exception under Section 3(1)(b)(i) applies only if the disablement is for three days or less.

Join Our Telegram Channel

40. Which of the following is/are the condition(s) precedent to valid retr

Which of the following is/are the condition(s) precedent to valid retrenchment of a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ?

Join Our Telegram Channel
  • 1. The workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment
  • 2. The workman has been paid at the time of retrenchment compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days’ average wages for every completed year of continuous service
  • 3. The workman has been paid at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to wages of thirty days service

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

1 only
1 and 2 only
2 only
1 and 3 only
This question was previously asked in
UPSC CISF-AC-EXE – 2022
Download PDFAttempt Online
The conditions precedent to valid retrenchment of a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 are primarily contained in Section 25F. Options 1 and 2 correctly state two of these conditions.
Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 lays down the conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen. For a workman who has been in continuous service for not less than one year, no employer shall retrench any such workman unless:
(a) the workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice; (Matches point 1)
(b) the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days’ average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months; (Matches point 2)
(c) notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government or such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette.
Point 3 is incorrect as the compensation is fifteen days’ average wages per year of service, not thirty days’ wages.
Compliance with these conditions is mandatory for a retrenchment to be considered valid. Failure to comply renders the retrenchment illegal and the workman is entitled to reinstatement with full back wages. Chapter V-A of the Act (Sections 25A to 25J) deals specifically with lay-off and retrenchment.

Subscribe on YouTube
Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5