The entitlement to relief under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act is not contingent on conviction, and the statutory obligation to assess damage must be fulfilled by the authorities.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 1,3 and 5 to pay the compensation of Rs.3,24,54,440/- as per the assessment made by the Department of Horticulture in their letter No.A/846/07 dated 19.05.2007 for Rs.1,01,02,600/-, Department of Forest in Na.Ka.No.48 of 2007 dated 15.06.2007 for Rs.1,24,69,590/-, and Department of Forest in Na.Ka.No.48 of 2007 dated 22.08.2007 for Rs.98,82,250/- respectively with interest to the Petitioner at the earliest.)

1. The subject matter of this writ petition is a compensation claim of Rs.3,24,54,440/- on the basis of assessments made by the Department of Horticulture and the Department of Forests pursuant to a complaint that an atrocity was committed in terms of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act).

2. The Petitioner belongs to the Hindu Paraiya community, which is a Scheduled Caste. He is an agriculturist who claims that he owns about 8.5 acres of land in Vembakkam Village, Cheyyar Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. He states that he had invested all his labour and money in developing the 8.5 acres as a farm by growing trees and plants, including decorative crotons therein. The 6th Respondent owns the adjoining lands and it is stated that there is enmity between the Petitioner and the 6th Respondent. According to the Petitioner, the 6th Respondent demanded that the Petitioner should sell his land to the 6th Respondent and move away from the village. It is alleged by the Petitioner that on 14.04.2007, at about 4.30 p.m., the 6th Respondent lit fire to a cycle tyre and threw it into the Petitioner’s property. The fire spread across the farm and destroyed several trees and plants. After dowsing the fire, at about 9.30 p.m., the Petitioner lodged a police complaint at the Brahmadesam Police Station. This resulted in a prosecution before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvannamalai, in S.C.No.62 of 2008. By judgment dated 23.01.2019, which was pronounced long after the writ petition was filed, the 6th Respondent was acquitted of the charges under Section 435 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC) read with Section 3(2)(iii) of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.

3. Meanwhile, by letter dated 19.05.2007, the Assistant Director of the Horticulture Department, Thiruvannamalai, informed the Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, that the Horticultural Officer, Cheyyar, inspected the farm of the Petitioner on 14.05.2007 in order to make an assessment of compensation for damage to the plants. On the basis of the said inspection, he submitted a report wherein he estimated the compensation for damage to the plants in a sum of Rs.1,01,02,600/-. With regard to the trees on the said property, two assessments were made. The first assessment was made pursuant to an inspection on 15.06.2007 by the Forest Range Officer, Inspection Wing. Pursuant to such inspection, as regards the damage to teak, rose wood and red sandalwood trees, by communication dated 15.06.2007, the Forest Range Officer informed the District Forest Officer, Thiruvannamalai, that the compensation was assessed in an aggregate sum of Rs.1,24,69,590/-. The 2nd communication dated 22.08.2007 was sent by the same Forest Range Officer to the District Forest Officer estimating the loss on account of the destruction of coconut, Jamun and Neem trees in an aggregate sum of Rs.98,82,250/-. After issuing several representations claiming compensation, it is stated that the Deputy Superintendent of Police only offered a sum of Rs.6,250/- as compensation by communication dated 11.02.2008. The present writ petition was filed in the above facts and circumstances.

4. I heard Mr.M.L.Ramesh, the learned counsel for the Petitioner; Mr.G.K.Muthukumar,