By the Court.—In these proceedings the petitioner has called into question the legality of an order dated 2 January 2014 passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Allahabad on an application which was moved under Section 6 of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 (the Act). The Collector has, taking due note of the fact that an amount of Rs. 20,000/- was paid over to the petitioner on account of an accidental death of his son caused due to electrocution, directed the payment of a further sum of Rs. 80,000/-. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order and claims an enhancement of the compensation to an amount of Rs. 5 lacs, on which interest has been claimed at the rate of 12% per annum.

2. The residential house of the petitioner is situated in Mohalla Ramkiyan Gandhi Nagar, Nagar Panchayat Sirsa, Allahabad. A high tension electric overhead cable passes in close proximity. On 8 August 2004, the high tension electric cable snapped, as a result of which the petitioner’s son Raj Kumar, who was about 24 years of age, came into contact with the wire and sustained grievous injury. The petitioner’s son succumbed to the injuries. A report of the incident was lodged by the petitioner at Police Station Meja, District Allahabad on 9 August 2004. The police prepared an inquest report and sent the dead body for post-mortem. The cause of the death was ascertained in the post-mortem report to be due to shock as a result of passage of electricity in the body. The petitioner’s son was, at the material time, a student of IInd year of the B.A. Degree course. The petitioner moved the U.P. Power Corporation for the grant of compensation. A detailed enquiry was conducted by the Joint Director. Since no further steps were taken for the disbursal of the compensation, the petitioner moved proceedings (Writ-C No. 60664 of 2010, Laxman alias Nand Lal Hela and another v. State of U.P. and others) before this Court. In the said proceedings, an order was passed on 29 October 2010 by a Division Bench of this Court by which a direction was issued to the effect that if the petitioner furnished all the relevant documentary material to the Executive Engineer, his claim for the grant of compensation shall be decided in accordance with law. In compliance with the order, the petitioner submitted a copy of the first information report, post-mortem report and succession certificate to the Executive Engineer in the Electricity Distribution Division of the first respondent. Since no action was initiated, the petitioner filed an application before the District Magistrate, Allahabad under Section 6 of the Act. At that stage, on 11 September 2013, the first respondent awarded an amount of Rs. 20,000/- to the petitioner by way of compensation. The District Magistrate by an order dated 2 January 2014 partly allowed the claim and directed the payment of compensation quantified as Rs. 1 lac after giving due credit for the amount of Rs. 20,000/-, which has already been paid. The petitioner is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation that has been awarded.

3. The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 was enacted by Parliament to provide for public liability insurance for the purpose of providing immediate relief to persons affected by accidents occurring while handling any hazardous substance. Section 2(a) of the Act defines the expression ‘accident’, as follows:

“(a) “accident” means an accident involving a fortuitous or sudden or unintended occurrence while handling any hazardous substance resulting in continuous or intermittent or repeated exposure to death of, or injury to, any person or damage to any property but does not include an accident by reason only of war or radio-activity;”

The expression ‘handling’ is defined in Section 2(c), thus:

“(c) “handling”, in relation to any hazardous substance, means the manufacture, processing, treatment, package, storage, transportation by vehicle, use, collection, destruction, conversion, offering for sale, transfer