The main legal point established is the obligation of the Electricity Board to compensate for death caused by electrocution, irrespective of the legal heirs' dependency.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the second respondent in Letter No.011631/Adm.II/A.1/2000-2, dated 17. 2000, quash the same and to direct the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-for the death of the petitioners father, on 10. 92, due to electrocution, with interest.

3. It has been stated by the petitioner that his father who was residing at Rajakamangalam Thurai had died on 10. 92, at 7.30 p.m, due to electrocution. When the petitioners father Elias was returning from Periakadu to Rajakamangalam Thurai, on 10. 92, he had come into contact with the live wire which was lying on the road, and due to electrocution he had died. The petitioner had given a complaint on 10. 92 and a case in Crime No.205 of 1992, had been registered on the file of Rajakamangalam Police Station, Kanyakumari District. The body of the petitioners father Elias, was sent for post mortem, on 92. It was proved that the death of the petitioners father had been caused by electrocution, due to the negligence of the respondent Electricity Board.

4. It has been further stated that the petitioner had submitted a representation, on 27. 93, requesting for payment of compensation. The fourth respondent had directed the petitioner to obtain the income certificate of his father and to forward the same to him, as per his letter, dated 18. 93. Again in the letter, dated 20.9.93, the fourth respondent had required a death certificate and a legal heirship certificate. Pursuant to the said communication, the death certificate and the legal heirship certificate has been forwarded to the fourth respondent. The legal heirship certificate, dated 26. 93 and the income certificate, dated 18. 93, were issued by the Tahsildar, Agastheeswaram Taluk. Similarly, the death certificate, dated 10. 92, was issued by the Registrar of Births and Death, Ganapathipuram and it was forwarded to the fourth respondent.

5. The petitioner had sent a further representation, dated 5. 97, to the Chief Minister (Special Cell), enclosing all the necessary certificates. The petitioner had sent a petition, dated 15. 97, to the District Collector, Kanyakumari District, at Nagercoil. Thereafter, the second respondent had sent a letter, dated 6. 97, informing the petitioner that certain particulars had been called for from the third respondent and that necessary action would be taken for payment of compensation, as requested by the petitioner. Subsequently, by a letter, dated NIL.3.98, the second respondent had called for certain records in original and directed the petitioner to forward the same through the Executive Engineer, Nagercoil. Accordingly, the petitioner had sent a letter, dated 3. 99, to the second respondent, through the third respondent, enclosing all the necessary certificates. However, the respondents did not take any action. Therefore, the petitioner had sent another representation, dated 3. 2000, to the second respondent. The second respondent in his letter No.011631/Adm.II/A.1/2000-2, dated 17. 2000, rejected the request of the petitioner. In such circumstances, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the claims and averments made on behalf of the petitioner had been denied. It has been stated that, on 10. 92, at about 10.30 hours, one Joseph had informed the fourth respondent that Elias had died, on 10. 92, at 7.30 p.m due to his coming in contact with a snapped live wire between Loc.No.FII/37 and FII/38. Immediately, the fourth respondent had rushed to the spot and preferred a complaint with the Sub Inspector of Police, Rajakkamangalam and a case had been registered, under Crime No.205