Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondent authorities to make payment of suitable compensation on account of death of the son of the petitioner, namely, Ranjit Kumar, who died in an accident, which took place due to him falling in an open drain, situated at Kankarbagh, which was being constructed by the National Building Construction Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “the NBCC”).

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that on 19.1.2010, the son of the petitioner along with his friend was returning back to his home on a bike and on the way, they fell down in an open drain, which was being constructed by the NBCC and had been excavated 20 feet deep, leading to death of the son of the petitioner. Thereafter, an FIR bearing Patrakar Nagar P.S. Case No. 13/2010 dt. 20.1.2010 was lodged. It is submitted that the construction work was being carried out negligently by the NBCC without barricading the area in question. It is also submitted that the police had investigated the matter and filed a charge-sheet dt. 31.7.2010, wherein it was stated that upon investigation of the case, inspection of the place of occurrence and on the basis of the available evidence, the case has been found to be true qua the contractor, namely, Gabudhan Singh @ Gabudhan Kumar @ Jee Kumar, under Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code. The said contractor is stated to have been appointed by the NBCC and the work in question had been sub-letted to him.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a judgment, rendered by this Court in the case of Rama Nand Rai vs. The State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 2021 (1) PLJR 361 [: 2021 (1) BLJ 291], to contend that a claim in public law for compensation for contravention of human rights, fundamental freedoms and for injuries caused on account of laxity & apathy of Govt. authorities and its instrumentalities is an acknowledged remedy, hence, the present writ petition has been filed for grant of compensation. It is also submitted that monetary or pecuniary compensation can very well be awarded by a writ Court & the same is an appropriate and an effective / suitable remedy for redressal of established infringement of fundamental right to life of a citizen and such claim of the petitioner is based on the principle of strict liability, to which the defence of sovereign immunity is not available.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the NBCC has submitted that the work in question was sub-letted to the aforesaid contractor and before start of the work in question, ample precautions were taken, the area in question had been barricaded and notices had also been issued in the newspapers, wherein it was stated that since the work of construction of main drain is going on at Kankarbagh, starting from tempo stand to Jogipur pump house & the area in question has been barricaded, it is requested that diversion or main road be used for crossing the road in question. It is thus contended that since there is no negligence on the part of the NBCC, it is not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioner, in lieu of the death of his son.

5. The learned counsel for the NBCC has further submitted that the aforesaid contractor has died during the interregnum period, hence, the criminal proceedings have abated. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner should have availed the remedy, provided for under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, by approaching the State Government for compensation.

6. As far as the State Government is concerned, it has washed its hands off the present case and has submitted that it is for the NBCC to take a call in the present case.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find that the primary issue, required to be addressed, is as to whether under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the present writ petition for grant of compensation in lieu of the death of the son of the petitioner, on account