Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
M. Duraikannan – Petitioner
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Welfare Department, Chennai & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 4992 of 2010
Decided On : 19-01-2021
Compensation Claim - SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act - 1989 - [COMPENSATION CLAIM] - [SC/ST PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES ACT, 1989, RULE 12] - The court discussed the application of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989, and Rule 12 in the context of a compensation claim of Rs.3,24,54,440/- based on assessments made by the Department of Horticulture and the Department of Forests. The court examined the statutory obligations, the assessment of damage, and the determination of relief amount, ultimately directing the State Government to pay an interim relief of Rs.1,50,000/- and ordering a proper assessment of the damage to be conducted by the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner, a member of the Hindu Paraiya community, filed a writ petition seeking compensation of Rs.3,24,54,440/- for damage to his farm, allegedly caused by the 6th Respondent. The 6th Respondent was acquitted of the charges under the IPC and the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act. Assessments for compensation were made by the Horticulture and Forest Departments, but the authorities failed to fulfill their statutory obligation to inspect the damage.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the preliminary objection that relief is not payable due to the acquittal of the 6th Respondent, and held that relief can be granted based on prima facie evidence of an atrocity. It found that the authorities failed to fulfill their statutory obligation to inspect the damage and determine relief, and directed the State Government to pay an interim relief of Rs.1,50,000/- and ordered a proper assessment of the damage to be conducted by the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police.
Issues: The issues involved the entitlement to relief despite the acquittal of the accused, the failure of the authorities to fulfill their statutory obligation to inspect the damage and determine relief, and the quantum of relief payable to the Petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that relief can be granted based on prima facie evidence of an atrocity, and that the failure of the authorities to fulfill their statutory obligation to inspect the damage and determine relief does not preclude the entitlement to relief. It directed the State Government to pay an interim relief of Rs.1,50,000/- and ordered a proper assessment of the damage to be conducted by the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police.
Final Decision: The court directed the State Government to pay an interim relief of Rs.1,50,000/- to the Petitioner and ordered a proper assessment of the damage to be conducted by the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police. It also clarified that the order does not preclude the initiation of appropriate proceedings by the Petitioner against the 6th Respondent or any other person for compensation.
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,
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
