The main legal point established in the judgment is that negligence and compensation claims cannot be decided under Article 226 without leading evidence and factual appreciation.

JUDGMENT :

Jatindra Prasad Das, J.

1. This intra Court appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.08.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in O.J.C. No. 10733 of 1998. The present appellants as wife, children and parents of late Sashi Bhusan Lenka filed the writ application against the opposite parties-respondents claiming compensation of Rs. 5,40,000/- (rupees five lakhs forty thousand) with interest to be paid by the respondents due to tragic death of Sashi Bhusan Lenka alleging inaction and negligence on the part of the opposite parties-respondents. It was their submission that the deceased, as usual left his house in the morning of 08.08.1997 informing his family members that after day's work, he would visit her sister's house in village Korei and thereafter would return home. He did not return. On the next day morning, the family members got an information that he has died meeting with an accident. The family members rushed to the spot and found the dead body with multiple injuries and the motorcycle used by the deceased lying nearby in a damaged condition. It was noticed that about 30 feet of the road leading to village Korei has been totally washed out due to heavy rain and the culvert was totally damaged. The position of the road was such that the damaged culvert was not visible to the approach road and any motorcyclist going even in the slowest speed would fall in the ditch, what had happened with the deceased. The petitioners alleged that even though, the road was so badly and dangerously damaged, still the opposite parties specifically, the Executive Engineer and S.D.O. of Rural Development Department, Jajpur district as well as the Block Development Officer of Korei Block, who were in-charge of maintaining the road in question had not taken any step for repair of the road nor they had put any signal or guard on the approaching roads to close the vehicular traffic on the said road. They alleged that due to such negligence on the part of the opposite parties, the deceased met with the fateful accident in the night of 08.08.1997. It was further submitted that the petitioner No. 1, namely, Sanju Lenka, wife of the deceased repeatedly approached the authorities for compensation but it was not paid heed to, for which they approached this Court for efficacious remedy claiming compensation as stated earlier. It was also pleaded inter alia on behalf of the petitioners that the deceased was the sole earning member of the family and being a energetic young man of 32 years of age was carrying on business of supplying coal to different coal depots and was also the owner of a Truck using the same for transport business. It was submitted that the husband of the appellant No. 1 had an income of about Rs. 4,500/- per month and his contribution towards family member was about Rs. 3,000/- per month.

2. It was the submission of opposite parties-respondents that the said road was earlier damaged due to heavy rain and flood in the month of July, 1997 and was repaired. Again due to high flood between 03.08.1997 and 06.08.1997, the repairs washed away and there was breach of the bridge on the aforesaid road. On getting information, immediate steps were taken by the concerned authorities to repair the same. It was further submitted that in the evening of 08.08.1997, humps of about 3 feet height were constructed on either side of the bridge with proper cautionary signal showing closure of the road. They counter alleged that in the night of 08.08.1997, the victim was prevented by local passersby from going on the said road but despite the preventive measures, the victim fell into the ditch due to his own negligence. They pleaded that there was absolutely no negligence on the part of the concerned authorities in attending to the damaged road but, the victim met with unfortunate death for his own negligence and carelessness. Hence, th