Judgment

G.T. Nanavati, J.-Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. In this batch of 10 appeals the question which arises for consider­ation is whether the High Court was justified in exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution and awarding compensation to the writ petitioners even though the appellants - who were the respondents in the said writ petitions - had denied their liability on the ground that the deaths had not occurred as a result of their negligence, but because of an act of God or of acts of some other persons.

3. In view of the final order that we propose to pass it is not neces­sary to state the facts of all these cases. We shall, therefore, narrate the facts of only one case - the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 5909 of 1998. A writ petition being O.J.C. No. 3351 of 1997 was filed by one Sukamani Das claiming to be the widow of Pratap Chandra Das of village Odangi seeking compensation for the death of her husband due to electrocution. It was averred in the writ petition that on 4.8.1996 Pratap Chandra Das, while he was proceeding from his village to another place for marketing, decided to return to his village as dark clouds gath