70 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
of this Bill to the War Injuries Ordinance to which I have made a reference is plain. As Honourable Members will recall, the War Injuries Ordinance, 1941, defines what is called the qualifying injuries. Those injuries are classified in that Ordinance. What the present Bill does is to adopt in the main the scope and limits of the qualifying injuries as has been defined in the War Injuries Ordinance. As to the question of relationship of the present Bill to the Workmen’s Compensation Act that will be clear to the Honourable Members from the fact that the amount of compensation which has been fixed in this Bill for the victim of war injuries more or less follows the scale that has been fixed in the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
Now, Sir, the reason for bringing this measure is this : After the War Injuries Ordinance was passed in 1941 a question was raised, a question which is of substance and if I may say so, of some importance and that question is whether the payment made to a workman who unfortunately happened to sustain what is called the qualifying injuries should be a sort of relief or should be compensation. The difference between relief and compensation is quite obvious. Relief is merely to help a person to get over the difficulties to which he might be reduced by reason of the incapacity which he suffers by a war injury and which prevents him from earning him normal wages. Compensation, on the other hand according to the terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, seeks to make payment which compensates him fully for the loss which he incurs. When this question was raised a reference was made to the conditions that were prevailing in England and it was found that the British Parliament passed an enactment which is known as the War Injuries Miscellaneous Act of 1936. On examination of the provisions of this English Law it was found that the payments which were allowed under that Act amounted to compensation and not merely relief. Obviously the question arose whether it was not desirable for the Government of India to follow the principle which was laid down in this English statues. Secondly, some of the employers, on their own accord after the passing of the War Injuries Ordinance of 1941, addressed a letter to the Government of India stating that from their point of view the provisions made in the War Injuries Ordinance were not sufficient for the maintenance of the morale of labour and that compensation should be paid in order that the labourers working in