2011 (2) ALD 580
High Court of Andhra Pradesh
A. GOPAL REDDY & P. DURGA PRASAD
State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Chief Secretary, Hyderabad & Another
Versus
M/s. J.K. Traders of Ramakrishna, represented by its Proprietor N. Jayakrishna
W.A. No. 1407 of 2000
Decided on : 31-12-2010
Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 19 and 21 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Sec. 34 – Limitation Act, 1963 – Art. 72 – Damage – Property – Protection – Compensation – Suit was filed for seeking protection from destruction of properties on the wide spread news of late Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of this country on 21-5-1991, large scale violence erupted throughout the country including in the State of Andhra Pradesh, and twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad on night of 21-5-1991, where large scale destruction of property, private and public, in different parts of the State – According to the petitioner, the Commission found guilty of the police for dereliction of duty in preventing damage to the property in NTR Estates – The Commissioner of Police also found guilty of not taking action on the basis of the report of the Additional Commissioner of Police – Petitioner got the damage suffered was assessed through Insurance Loss Assessor – Based on which, the District Collector & District Magistrate issued a certificate certifying that the petitioner suffered a loss to a tune of Rs.1,51,50,000/- – police and the State have totally failed to give protection to the property of the petitioner and in spite of approaching the police suspecting that unruly hooligans may took the advantage of the situation under their control and may ransack the property belongs to the opposition party leader, the police allowed the unruly hooligans in ransacking the N.T.R. Estates and set fire to it – As it is a violation of the fundamental right as well as constitutional right, the petitioner is entitled to compensation for the loss suffered by him on account of the inaction on the part of the police authorities – Held, Certificate issued by the District Collector, Hyderabad cannot form the basis for awarding compensation, since the same is not assessed and issued under any statutory power conferred on the Collector in assessment of the damages. It is not a public document under Sec. 74 or an official document under Sec. 78 of the Evidence Act – Hence, the same cannot be taken as a conclusive proof to come to a conclusion that the writ petitioner suffered a loss to a tune of Rs.1,51,50,000/- as mentioned in the certificate issued by the Collector to claim compensation – The basis for issuing such a certificate and how he arrived the said figure has to be established by leading evidence in support of it before the competent court in a properly constituted civil suit – court is of the view that the learned single Judge committed a serious error in entertaining writ petition and awarding compensation against the State Government, and also awarding interest, de hors restriction in awarding of interest under Sec. 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure – Writ Appeal is allowed .
(A. GOPAL REDDY, J)
1. WA No.1407/2000 under Cl.15 of the Letters Patent by (1) State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Chief Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad; (2) District Collector and District Magistrate, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad and (3) Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, is directed against the judgment/order dt. 28-8-2000 allowing WP No.15050/1993 by the learned single Judge of this Court awarding compensation of one crore rupees for the damage of the property belongs to the writ petitioner on the aftermath of assassination of late Rajiv Gandhi.
2. To put very shortly, the essential admitted facts, which give rise to filing of the writ petition, are thus:
On the wide spread news about assassination of late Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of this country on 21-5-1991, large scale violence erupted throughout the country including in the State of Andhra Pradesh, and twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad on the night of 21-5-1991, where large scale destruction of property, private and public, in different parts of the State. On coming to know about the incident of assassination and since Sri N.T. Rama Rao was the leader of opposition, the Manager of Ahwanam Hotels, Mr. Ramanaiah expressing fear of possibility of some attack on NTR Estates at Abids reported to the police of Abids Police Station for providing necessary protection to safeguard the properties. According to the Commissioner of police-third respondent, Inspector of Police, Abids Police Station informed about the non-availability of police force at the police station, but around 23-30 hours, the then Commissioner of Police instructed Ramesh Kumar, S.I. of Abids Police Station to deploy police force at the house of Sri N.T.Rama Rao and also at N.T.R. Estates, Abids. Accordingly, police picket was posted at the residence of Sri N.T. Rama Rao at Abids. According to the petitioner, the police could not move in the matter and delayed the steps to be taken to protect the interests of NTR Estates including Ramakrishna 70 MM theatre. In the meanwhile, about 150 persons had gathered outside the theatre and while they were making attempts to enter into the N.T.R. Estates, Ramanaiah, Manager of Ahwanam Hotel passed on the information to various persons but could not receive any help from anyone especially from the police. Even police who came to the spot did not take steps to prevent the damage to N.T.R. Estates and played a second fiddle to the men in power and the mob gathered there were belonging to the Congress Party workers caused extensive damage to the theatre. The police did not take any positive action to prevent from causing damage to the theatre though it could have been possible. After the damage was caused, the Commissioner of Police deputed one Mr. Siva Shanker, Additional Commissioner of Police to enquire into the situation leading to the damage of the theatre. He conducted personal enquiry and submitted his report finding the police officers guilty of dereliction of duties and they have irresponsibly behaved in preventing the property in question. The Government of Andhra Pradesh appointed a Commission of Inquiry under Section 3 of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 consisting of a single member viz., Sri Justice M.R.A.Ansari, a retired Chef Justice of Jammu & Kashmir High Court, through G.O.Ms.No.511, General Administration (Genl.B) Department dt. 22-8-1991 as one-Man Commission to enquire into the widespread incidents of violence involving destruction of properties occurred in several places in Andhra Pradesh following the assassination of Sri Rajiv Gandhi in Tamil Nadu on the night of 21-5-1001. The Commission submitted its report to the Government on 20-6-1992 with its findings in terms of the reference made to it. One Man Commission found that the violent reaction did not lead to attack on public property as generally happened but to attack on private property belonging to the members of the opposition parties in t
M. NAGA VENKATA LAKSHMI VS. VISKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORP. (2007) 8 SCC 748
SUBE SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA (2006) 3 SCC 178
M. S. GREWAL VS. DEEP CHAND (2001) 8 SCC 151
NILABATI BAHERA V. STATE OF ORISSA (1993) 2 SCC 746=AIR 1993 SC 1960
CONSUMER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH CENTRE VS. UNION OF INDIA (1995) 3 SCC 42
LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENTAUTHORITY VS. M. K. GUPTA (1994) 1 SCC 243
D. K. BASU VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL (1997) 1 SCC 416
DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTIES VS. STATE OF A. P. (2009) 5 SCC 212
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH (1996) 1 SCC 742
S.S. AHLUWALIA V. UNION OF INDIA (2001) 4 SCC 452
VOLGA TELLIS V. BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AIR 1986 SC 180
Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar (1983) 4 SCC 141)
Women’s Resources Centre v. Commissioner of Police
State of Maharashtra v. Ravikant S. Patil (1991) 2 SCC 373)
KHATRI (II) V. STATE OF BIHAR (1981) 1 SCC 627)
UNION CARBIDE CORPORTION V. UNION OF INDIA (1991) 4 SCC 584)
State of M. P. v. Shyam Sunder Trivedi (1995) 4 SCC 262)
Peoples Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1997) 3 SCC 433)
Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. State of Bihar (1991) 3 SCC 482
Dr. Jacob George v. State of Kerala (1994) 3 SCC 430)
Paschim Bangal Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West Bengal and Ors. (1996) 4 SCC 37)
Mrs. Manju Bhatia v. New Delhi Municipal Council (1997) 6 SCC 370)
gpt-4
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.