Can a Maintenance Head Be a 'Competent Person' for Machine Inspections Under the Factories Act?

Can a head of the maintenance department be called a competent person to inspect machines under Section 29 of the Factories Act, 1948?

Section 29: Lifting Machines, Chains, Ropes, and Lifting Tackles

Examination By: These should be thoroughly examined by a competent person at least once every six months. A register must be kept containing the prescribed particulars of every such examination.

Competent Person: This refers to a person or an institution recognized as such by the Chief Inspector for the purposes of carrying out tests, examinations, and inspections required to be done in a factory under the provisions of this Act. This recognition is based on:

(i) The qualifications and experience of the person and facilities available at their disposal, or

(ii) The qualifications and experience of the persons employed in such an institution and the facilities available therein, with regard to the conduct of such tests, examinations, and inspections. More than one person or institution can be recognized as a competent person in relation to a factory.

Therefore, no one can be a suitable officer, i.e., a competent authority to inspect and certify, without proper recognition.

Try to hire certified engineers accordingly only.

If your head of the maintenance department is recognized by the Chief Inspector of Factories as a competent person, then it's okay. But if it is not, then it is advisable to seek help from a suitable vendor who is authorized.

Normally, it is not objected if your Maintenance Manager undergoes certification after careful examination of all the documents you submit in your post. His certification-related activities should be genuine and convincing to the Director of Factories. However, if the Director of Factories does not accept his certification and still insists on any of his nominated Engineers, whom he deems competent, then only should you proceed with it. Rest assured, there is no non-compliance as long as your Maintenance Manager strictly adheres to true compliance. Furthermore, Factory Inspectors are expected to provide guidance, which is the primary objective of the law.

Regards,
RDS Yadav
Director - Future Institute of Management and Technology
Labour Law Adviser
Navtarang HR Services

Dear Mr. Dubey, A competent person is an engineer with prescribed qualifications and approved by the Director of Industrial Safety & Health (Chief Factory Inspector). Therefore, inspection and certification by your maintenance head (no matter how qualified he may be) would not be legally valid. You will need to have the lifting machines, lifting tackles, etc., tested by a Competent Person approved by the Director of Industrial Safety & Health (Chief Inspector of Factories - CIF) of your State.

In some States, the CIF may certify a qualified engineer as a Competent Person. Such an engineer can inspect and certify the lifting devices and issue a certificate as prescribed in the State Factories Rules. Therefore, your maintenance head must apply to the CIF of your State to be certified as a Competent Person. Any other engineer of the company who meets the criteria for a Competent Person can also apply to the CIF.

I am afraid the advice offered by Mr. RDS Yadav in this thread is not legally valid. Please discuss the matter with your CIF and take the necessary steps.

Advice on Lifting Hooks Inspection

One more piece of advice: While examining the lifting hooks, insist that the Competent Person also checks the following:
- Throat opening of the hook (if it is 15% or more than the original throat opening, it needs to be discarded and replaced with a new one).

Kind regards

I just replied to your query, but before I could complete it fully, by mistake, it got posted. So this post is in continuation of the previous one.

Advice: Please insist on the Competent Person to also check the following (they don't do it unless you demand):

• Checking of the throat opening on the lifting hook (if it exceeds 15% of the original throat opening, it is unsafe and needs to be discarded and replaced with a new one).

• Checking the deflection of the lifting hook (if the deflection of the hook from its plane is +/-10 degrees, it needs to be discarded and replaced with a new one).

Regards,
A.K. Gupta

Dear Mr. A.K. Gupta,

Thank you for your participation and for providing great insights. We look forward to your active engagement in other threads as well.

@Mrk12 - As the thread starter, could you please update the forum on whether your query has been resolved?

Thank you.