Back
2018 Supreme(Mad) 3405
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Pushpa Sathyanarayana, T. Krishnavalli, JJ.
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
M. Nithiya – Respondent
W.A. No. 1091 of 2017 and Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 7505 of 2017
Decided On : 12-09-2018
J. Padmavathi Devi, R. Alagumani.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the State's liability to compensate for the death of a minor caused by the State's failure to prevent illegal activities, emphasizing the State's obligation to protect the life and liberty of citizens.
Headnote:
Compensation - Death of Minor in Accident - IPC 304(A), Act 14 of 1982 - The court awarded compensation of Rs. 10 Lakhs to the writ petitioner for the death of her minor daughter in an accident involving a bullock cart engaged in illegal sand mining. The court held that the State, which is bound to protect the life and liberty of the citizens, failed to do so and is liable to compensate the writ petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner's daughter died in an accident involving a bullock cart engaged in illegal sand mining. The petitioner sought compensation and compassionate appointment, despite receiving some financial assistance from the government.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the State failed to prevent illegal quarrying of sand, leading to the death of the minor daughter. The court held the State liable to compensate the writ petitioner and awarded Rs. 10 Lakhs as compensation.
Issues: The issues involved the negligence of the State officials in preventing illegal sand mining, the liability of the State to compensate for the death of the minor, and the adequacy of the relief already provided to the writ petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the State's failure to prevent illegal sand mining, which led to the death of the minor, constituted negligence and dereliction of duty. The court also emphasized the State's obligation to protect the life and liberty of citizens.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was dismissed, confirming the order of the learned single Judge to award Rs. 10 Lakhs as compensation to the writ petitioner.
1. The Writ Appeal has been directed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent as against the order of the learned single Judge of this court, dated 15.06.2017 and made in W.P. (MD) No. 10913 of 2010 on the file of this court.
2. It is manifested from the records that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner had filed a writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the appellants 1 to 3/respondents 1 to 3 to pay compensation for the death of the writ petitioner's daughter namely Dhanalakshmi aged 9 years and grant employment to the writ petitioner on compassionate appointment and consequently directing the respondents therein to initiate necessary action against the said offenders operating in Vaigai Riverbed at Sholavanthan.
3. In the writ petition, it was contended by the writ petitioner that the petitioner's daughter Dhanalakshmi aged about 9 years died in an accident by a bullock cart and in pursuance of the complaint, a case stands registered in Crime No. 150 of 2010 by the Sholavanthan Police Station, Madurai under Section 304(A) IPC and the writ petitioner gave request for giving compensation and compassionate appointment to her and to take appropriate action against the offenders. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that Rs. 1,00,000/ was paid to the writ petitioner out of the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. In the meantime, her husband also died and for that, Rs. 10,000/- was paid to the writ petitioner under Social Security Scheme and Rs. 1000/- per month is being paid to her towards widow pension from the month of October 2010. Despite the same, she has filed a writ petition seeking compensation, employment and to take action against the offenders.
4. This court by order, dated 10.08.2010 directed the District Collector, Madurai to consider the request of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment. In so far as the action against the offenders ere concerned, penalty was imposed as against 34 persons to the tune of Rs. 7,28,800/- and directed to detain one offender under Act 14 of 1982.
5. It is seen from the records that the Accused in Crime No. 150 of 2010 was discharged in a Lok Adalat proceedings on receipt of Rs. 5,000/- as fine. The writ petitioner has been appointed as ''Sweeper'' on temporary basis at the Officer of the Thasildar, Vadipatti and paid salary, out of the contingent fund. In the above circumstances, by order, dated 15.06.2017, the writ petition was allowed with a direction to pay a sum of Rs. 10 Lakhs with interest @ 7.5% from 18.08.2010 till payment.
6. Having been aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge of this court, dated 15.06.2017, the appellants being the respondents in the above writ petition stand before this court with this appeal.
7. Heard Mrs. J. Padmavathi Devi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and Mr. R. Alagumani, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and perused the materials available on record.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/respondents has contended that the learned single Judge ought to have dismissed the writ petition at the stage of admission itself; that the learned single Judge ought to have considered that all the reliefs sought for by the writ petitioner have been met and action was taken against the offenders and now, the writ petitioner has been given employment and apart from this, she is receiving widow pension and she has been also paid Rs. 1,00,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation; that the State Government cannot be held liable for the negligent act of the driver of the bullock cart and the Government is not a tort-feaser for whose negligence, it could be held liable for payment of compensation. It is well settled that compensation is not intended to be a bonaza and in the present case, the writ petitioner has received Rs. 1,00,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- and she has been working on temporary basis and further she has been paid Rs. 1,000/-
