HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
V. Shanmugam (Deceased) & Others - Appellants
Versus
Union of India Rep by the Secretary Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, New Delhi & Others - Respondents
W.P.No. 2191 of 2015
Decided On : 23-03-2023
Mandamus - Compensation for Death of Student - National Service Scheme (NSS) - Negligence - Voluntary Participation - Approval and Safety Measures - [NSS, Negligence, Compensation]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought compensation for the death of his son, a 3rd year B.E. student, who drowned during a coastal clean-up program organized by the college. The college and authorities denied responsibility, stating the student voluntarily entered the sea against instructions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the college failed to obtain necessary approval and inform the authorities about the program. However, the deceased student voluntarily entered the sea against instructions, and the court held that the college's negligence was a milder form of negligence.
Issues: The issues involved negligence, voluntary participation, and the responsibility of the college and authorities in ensuring safety measures for the students during the NSS program.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the college's negligence was a milder form, it failed to obtain necessary approval and inform the authorities about the program, resulting in the loss of life. The deceased student's voluntary act exonerated the college from liability.
Final Decision: The court directed the college to pay a fixed compensation of Rs.5,00,000 to the petitioners for the loss of their son.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the petitioner a minimum compensation of Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of this writ petition till date of payment for the death of his son S.Madhanagopal, who was 3rd year B.E. (EEE) student in Pallavan College of Engineering, Thimmasamudram, Kancheepuram 631 502.)
The Writ of Mandamus is filed to direct the respondents to pay the petitioner a minimum compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty Five Lakhs) with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the present writ petition till the date of payment for the death of the son of the writ petitioner S.Madhanagopal, who was a 3rd year B.E. (EEE) student in the Pallavan College of Engineering, Thimmasamudram, Kancheepuram.
2. The 1st petitioner states that he hails from a poor family and is running a tea stall at Pallikudathan Street, Kancheepuram. He had two children, a daughter and son. His son, S.Madhanagopal was studying in the 8th respondent / Pallavan College of Engineering. He was doing B.E. (EEE) 3rd year. Unfortunately, the son of the 1st petitioner died on 27.09.2014, while participating in the NSS Programme called “International Coastal Clean-up” organised by the respondents 4, 6 and 8 in the coastal area from Koovathur to Thenpattinam, Kancheepuram District. There were 54 students along with the son of the petitioner. His son left home at 6:00 a.m. on 27.09.2014 to participate in the said programme. At about 3:00 p.m on 27.09.2014, the family members of the petitioner were informed through residential phone by the 10th respondent that his son had died about 2:00 p.m. drowning in the sea. The respondents 7 to 10, who were responsible for the safety of my son, had not even cared to give a complaint to the Police about the death of the son of the petitioner.
3. A Police complaint was registered in E5 Koovathur Police Station, Kancheepuram District. A legal notice was issued by the father-in-law of the 1st petitioner on 04.10.2014 to the 8th respondent and other authorities. The 8th respondent sent a reply by stating that due care and diligence was taken by the faculty members and the son of the petitioner himself invited the fatal end and therefore, the College is not responsible. During the pendency of the writ petition, the 1st petitioner died on 20.04.2020. Subsequently, wife and daughter of 1st petitioner were substituted in the writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the National Service Scheme (NSS) falls under the 1st respondent / Union of India, who is responsible for the administration, policy planning, implementation and evaluation of NSS Programmes. The State of Tamil Nadu has a public duty to explain the policies of 1st respondent regarding NSS Programme to the youth and to implement successfully all NSS Programmes. The Government of India extends financial assistance for establishing the State NSS Cell.
5. The 9th respondent is the NSS coordinator in the 8th respondent / College. The 5th respondent is the NSS coordinator at the University level and the 9th respondent is the NSS coordinator at the College level. They have conducted the programme called “International Coastal Clean-up”. The NSS Programmes are conducted by utilising the public funds. The 3rd respondent being the District Collector of Kancheepuram District ought to have taken adequate safety measures with the help of the Coast Guard Personnel to oversee the entire coastal clean-up in the said coastal area. When the two students viz., son of the 1st petitioner and one Lalith Kumar were drowning in the sea, a courageous student namely Michael Antony jumped into the sea and tried his best to save both of them, but unfortunately, Lalith Kumar alone could be saved. None from the Coastal Guard Department was available to save the lives of the students in the e
Basheshar Nath Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi and Rajasthan and Another
The main legal point established is that while the college's negligence was a milder form, it failed to obtain necessary approval and inform the authorities about the program, resulting in the loss o....
The judgment established that the duty of care and negligence principles apply even in voluntary activities, holding the college responsible for failing to ensure safety measures.
Teachers have a heightened duty of care under the doctrine of loco parentis; failure to fulfill this duty resulting in student harm makes the state vicariously liable for their negligence.
Teachers must exercise a higher duty of care to ensure student safety during school events, as failure to do so can lead to liability for resulting harm.
The State is vicariously liable for negligence resulting in the deaths of minors due to lack of safety measures, warranting compensation to their families.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the State and the responsible party to pay compensation for negligent death, based on the duty to provide safety measures and exe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of care owed by State authorities to provide a safe and secure environment for children, and the liability of the State for reparation of ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.