JUDGMENT

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the Respondents 1 and 2 and anyone under their authority to grant a compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- for their due negligence, careless and breach of duty on the petitioner representation FIR, dated 20.09.2019 with the law.

1. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Mandamus seeking a direction against the Chairman and Managing Director, Tamilnadu Electricity Board Limited and the Chairman and Managing Director, Tamilnadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)/ Respondents 1 and 2 to grant compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- for negligence, careless and breach of duty, which caused the death of the son of the petitioner due to electrocution.

2. The son of the petitioner, by name, M.S.Manojkumar was aged 13 years. On 19.09.2017, he went out of the house to look after his grandmother in the next street at around 08.00 pm. At that time, it was raining. While crossing the lane, he touched an electric pole kept by a private person, through which, the electricity supply given by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board passed. It is claimed that earthing facility was not provided in the pole. The boy was electrocuted and he died. Claiming that the death was due to negligence of the respondents, the Writ Petition has been filed. The petitioner had sent a representation. But, there was no response.

3. A counter had been filed on behalf of the respondents, denying negligence. It was stated that the Electricity Board had often advertised that electric poles should not be touched during rain. It was also stated that because the deceased had come into contact with the wire of the electricity transmission, he had died. This would not by itself be a reason to claim that there was negligence on the part of the respondents. It was also stated that there was heavy rain and wind and therefore, the boy died due to the Act of God.

4. It was stated that a sum of 5,00,000/- has been proposed to be granted as compensation by the Board proceedings in events of accident. Reliance was also placed on a judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in Gothavari Sugar Mills vs. State of Maharastra and others, reported in (2011) 2 SCC 439.

5. Before proceeding further, this Court must express its strong condemnation that the Respondents 1 to 3, against whom relief was sought had not even thought of filing a counter or responding to the Court. May be, since they are holding the posts of Chairman and Managing Director, TNEB and TANGEDCO and Superintending Engineer, respectively, they are of the opinion that it is below their dignity to put their thoughts in writing with respect to a claim seeking compensation for the death of a young boy of 13 years over whom they are not directly bothered. They appear to have no sense of duty either to a citizen or to this Court and this Court can state that Respondents 1 to 3 have lost their right or authority to continue in their particular offices in their position. As public servants, they have a duty to discharge to every citizen of the Country. They may deny the contentions raised in the Writ Petition, but they cannot hide behind a counter filed by the Assistant Engineer, Karupayurani, Madurai, who is the fourth respondent herein. If they feel that the fourth respondent can represent them in Court proceedings, it only shows that they have scant regard for the dignity of their office.

6. Heard arguments advanced by Mr.R.Prakasam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms.M.Rajeswari, learned Counsel for Mr.S.M.S.Johnny Basha, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

7. During the course of arguments, the learned Counsel for the petitioner insisted that compensation must be paid and the learned Counsel for the respondents denied liability to pay any compensation.

8. The facts are quite simple. The son of the petitioner, at 08.00 pm on 19.09.2017, when it was raining, crossed the road to go