Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2006 Supreme(Mad) 2629

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. JAICHANDREN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.E.N. PATRUDU
P.P.M. Thangaiah Nadar Firm, rep. by its Partner T.P. Prakasam & Others - Appellant
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. By its Chief Secretary & Others - Respondents
W.P.Nos.2705 of 1999, 6163 of 1999 and 10146 of 1999 and W.M.P.Nos.3856 of 1999 and 8896 of 1999
Decided On : 29 September 2006

Appearing Advocates:For the Petitioners:R. Gandhi Senior Counsel for K. Ravichandra Babu, A.L. Somayaji, Senior Counsel for K. Govi Ganesan, Sathish Parasaran Advocates. For the Respondents:P.S. Raman Addl. Advocate General assisted by P. Subramanian Govt. Advocate.

Destruction of property in violence, though not to be considered as violation of Fundamental Right under Article 21, such right being Constitutional Right, has to be protected.

Headnote:Commissions of Inquiry Act (60 of 1952), Section 3(1) - Constitution of India (1950), Articles 21, 226, 300-A - Despite deletion of Articles 19(1)(f) and 31, right, recognized under Article 300-A, can be protected by approaching High Court under Article 226 - Destruction of property in violence , though not to be considered as violation of Fundamental Right under Article 21, such right being Constitutional Right, has to be protected - State has duty to protect life, liberty and property of person - However, question of compensation payable is a matter of inference to be considered on facts of each case - State is liable to pay compensation to victims if it is established that officers of State failed to protect life, liberty and property of person and if such failure amounts to dereliction of duty.

Judgment :-

(W.P.No.2705 of 1999 has been filed to issue writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the order of the 2nd respondent passed in G.O.Ms.No.1834 (Law and Order P) Department, dated 6.11.1998 and quash the same in so far as the fixation of the compensation to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs only and direct the respondents to sanction and pay a sum of Rs.1,84,42,775/- as ascertained by the Enquiry Commission headed by Hon'ble V.K. Thirunavukarasu, District Judge in his report dated 25.6.1997 forthwith with interest.

W.P.No.6163 of 1999 has been filed to issue writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the order of the 2nd respondent passed in G.O.Ms.No.1834 (Law and Order P) Department, dated 6.11.1998 and quash the same in so far as it restricts the compensation to Rs.2 lakhs only and direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.85,74,000/- to the first petitioner as compensation as recommended by the One Man Commission headed by in its report dated 25.6.1997 forthwith with interest.

W.P.No.10146 of 1999 has been filed to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay Rs.70,00,000/- as damages as compensation to the petitioner for the loss sustained by the petitioners during the mob violence and riot which took place on 10-5-1996 at Tuticorin.)

Common Order:

P.K. Misra, J.

W.P.No.2705 of 1999 has been filed for issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the order of the 2nd respondent passed in G.O.Ms.No.1834 (Law and Order P) Department, dated 6.11.1998 and quash the same in so far as the fixation of the compensation to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs only and directing the respondents to sanction and pay a sum of Rs.1,84,42,775/- as ascertained by the Enquiry Commission headed by Thiru V.K. Thirunavukarasu, District Judge in his report dated 25.6.1997 forthwith with interest.

W.P.No.6163 of 1999 has been filed for issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the order of the 2nd respondent passed in G.O.Ms.No.1834 (Law and Order P) Department, dated 6.11.1998 and quash the same in so far as it restricts the compensation to Rs.2 lakhs only and directing the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.85,74,000/- to the first petitioner as compensation as recommended by the One Man Commission headed by in its report dated 25.6.1997 forthwith with interest.

W.P.No.10146 of 1999 has been filed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay Rs.70,00,000/- as damages to the petitioner for the loss sustained by the petitioners during the mob-violence and riot which took place on 10-5-1996 at Tuticorin.

2. Before considering the question referred, a brief narration of the facts as culled out from the order passed by the learned single Judge is called for.

On the eve of the Assembly Elections, there was a communal clash in Thoothukudi town on 9.5.1996 between Baradhavar (Fernando) and Nadar communities, which continued unabated for a few days. On 11.5.1996, there was a police firing, resulting in the death of few persons. During such rioting, large scale of arson and looting took place, resulting in damages to properties of several persons belonging to the two groups. Thereafter, the people belonging to business class of Tuticorin shut down their shops from 16.5.1996 demanding adequate police protection and payment of compensation to those who had sustained loss due to such communal clash. At that stage, the Government of Tamil Nadu in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3(1) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, constituted a Commission of Inquiry headed by a District Judge. The terms of reference were as follows: -

(i) To inquire into and report the cases and circumstances that led to the clashes between two communities in Thoothukudi from 10-5-1996 and subsequent occurrences of Law and Order disturbances.

(ii) To inquire into and report the causes and circumstances that led to the opening of fire by the Polic

Click Here to Read the rest of this document