JUDGMENT
A.A. Desai, J.
1. In respect of compensation payable for the injuries, the parties, pursuant to section 28 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, submitted the agreement dated 12-4-1982 for registration. By order dated 21-9-1982, the Commissioner refused to register.
2. In these appeals, the submission of Shri Pendharkar, the learned Counsel for the appellant, is that having regard to the scheme of section 28(1)(d) of the Act read with Rule 51 of Workmen’s Compensation Rules, the Commissioner is under obligation to make further enquiry whether the compensation agreed upon is just and adequate. Refusal to register the agreement does not relieve the Commissioner from the statutory duty to probe into the aspect. Directing the workmen to approach the Commissioner under section 22 of the Act would lead to multiplicity of the proceedings. As such, non-exercise of power has contravened the provisions of beneficial legislation.
3. At the time of verification of agreement dated 12-4-1982, workmen were absent. On enquiry from the employer and Union, it was reported to the Commissioner that workmen had resiled from the agreement. The Commissioner, therefore, refused to register the agreement. Refusal was not for the reasons envisaged by sub-clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 28 of the Act. The workmen did not continue to be party to the agreement. Document ceases to be an agreement. As such, the same could not be entertained. Refusal to register so recorded in the impugned order was not in terms of the provisions. The same cannot be construed to mean the refusal under the provisions.
4. The Commissioner, in such cases, is not charged with any responsibility to probe into the aspect of just or otherwise of the compensation. The workman having resiled the agreement, have no right to invoke the jurisdiction of Commissioner to adjudicate any of the aspects under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 28 of the Act. The workmen were at liberty to approach the Commissioner under section 22 of the Act.
5. The appeals are without any merit and hence, the same are dismissed. No order as to costs.
6. Appeal dismissed.