IMPORTANT POINT
Compensation for violations of fundamental rights under public law is based on strict liability, independent of private law claims.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral): Challenge in the present writ petition is to the impugned order dated 06.01.2023 passed by the respondent No.3-Chief Engineer/Operation, DHBVNL, Delhi whereby the claim of the petitioner to grant compensation on account of death of their son namely Arav Sharma has been rejected and a further prayer to direct the respondents to pay the compensation to the tune of Rs. 25 lacs to the petitioner alongwith 18% per annum w.e.f. 30.01.2020.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contends that on 30.01.2020, Arav Sharma aged 03 years, the son of the petitioners was playing on the terrace and all of a sudden, the heavy electricity line of 11000 KV passing abutting the roof of the petitioner struck the child leading to an immediate death. The matter was reported to the District Administration immediately and a postmortem was conducted on 31.01.2020. A FIR No. 0017 dated 01.02.2020 was also registered qua the incident for commission of offence under Section 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code. He points out that a representation had been submitted by the petitioners on 06.02.2020 to the Executive Engineer-City, OP-Division, DHBVN, Mehrauli Road, Gurugram for grant of compensation which is appended as Annexure P-3.

3. Earlier, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing of CWP-177 of 2022 which was disposed of vide order dated 10.10.2022 with a direction to the respondent-authorities to treat the said writ petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioners and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months of receipt of certified copy of this order after granting an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties. The petitioner No.1 was initially called upon by the Executive Engineer (Op.) Division City, DHBVN, Gurugram for personal hearing with supporting documents to redress the compensation. However, vide order dated 06.01.2023, the respondent-authorities declined the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the said incident occurred due to the negligence of the petitioners as the petitioners had done illegal construction on the house.

4. Upon issuance of notice, written statement on behalf of respondents No.2 to 6 through Avinash Yadav, Executive Engineer, “Operation” City Division, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. was filed, wherein it was averred that the accident in question had not occurred as a result of carelessness or negligence of the distribution licensee. It has been averred that the petitioners have illegally extended his house almost beneath the 11 KV line. The illegal construction has been extended horizontally as well as vertically. Further, the bathroom is constructed with temporary structure just under 11 KV line. The respondent-authorities also dispute the fact that any representation was submitted by the residents of the area under Sub Division Kadipur to shift the line from the boundary line of the houses. It is also averred that no complaint was lodged regarding this incident.

5. In response thereto, replication has been filed by the petitioner who has denied the allegations leveled and the plea raised by the respondent/distribution licensee.

6. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended alongwith the present petition.

7. The Apex Court in the matter of “Sanjay Gupta and others versus State of Uttar Pradesh and others” reported as (2022) 7 SCC 203 has observed as under:-

13. xx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

48. In D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. (1997) 1 SCC 416 it was held that the claim in public law for compensation for unconstitutional deprivation of fundamental right to life and liberty, the protection of which is guaranteed under the Constitution, is a claim based on strict liability and is in addition to the claim available in private law for damages for tortious acts of the public servants. Public law proceedings serve a differen