A writ petition under Article 226 can seek compensation for statutory breaches without relegating to civil courts, utilizing principles from the Motor Vehicles Act for quantification.

ORDER

The husband of petitioner No.1 and the father of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 died on 13.11.2014 due to electrocution, and the petitioners are before this Court seeking a direction for the respondents to pay just and proper compensation for the death of their husband and father attributed to negligence by the respondents. The mother-in-law of petitioner No.1's husband obtained an electricity connection from BESCOM for the pumpset to irrigate her land. On 13.11.2014, petitioner No.1's husband went to the mother-in-law's agricultural land to irrigate standing chilly crops. Since there was no power supply, he tried to start the motor, and when it didn't start, he checked it with a tester. At that moment, high- voltage electricity entered the motor, causing the deceased to come into contact with it and resulting in his death due to electrocution. Hence, this petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1383/2020 and connected petitions, wherein under identical circumstances, compensation was granted to the claimant by adopting the method under the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No.3 argues that since disputed facts are involved, the present petition is not maintainable, and the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to approach the jurisdictional civil court to adjudicate their claims. He further argues that the question of negligence cannot be addressed in this petition and must be adjudicated by the civil court after affording an opportunity to the parties. He also contends that the accident was not a result of the rash and negligent act of the respondents' personnel, and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to claim compensation from the respondents, seeking dismissal of the petition.

4. The fact that petitioner No.1's husband died due to electrocution is not in dispute, and an FIR was registered in Crime No.152/2014 against four accused persons who are personnel of the respondents. The petitioner has annexed a copy of the report submitted by the Electric Inspector, which indicates negligence attributed to the respondents' personnel. The Electric Inspector, examined as PW.9 in C.C.No.667/2015, admitted that petitioner No.1's husband died due to electrocution and further attributed negligence to both him and the respondents' personnel. After investigation, the Electric Inspector submitted a detailed report attributing negligence to the respondents' personnel.

5. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.1383/2020 and connected cases disposed of on 04.08.2022 in identical circumstances has ruled as follows:

"18. Insofar as the contention that the writ petition is not maintainable, it is to be noticed that the Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for enforcement of Public Law Remedy is de-hors the remedy available to claim compensation under the Private Law Remedy before the Civil Courts.

19. The breach of a statutory obligation resulting in harm to a person can be sought to be addressed by way of a Public Law Remedy through a petition under Article 226 . The compensation granted in such an action is made in the nature of making monetary amends for such breach of statutory duty by a State Authority.

C. Relegation to Civil Court after granting provisional compensation :-

20. It is the contention of the respondents that the only appropriate remedy is to relegate the parties to invoke remedy available in the nature of claim for damages in an action based on law of torts before the appropriate Civil Courts.

21. It is contended that the disputed facts which may arise in relation to the cause of the accident and also quantification of damages as regards income earning capacity and economic potential of a child. As an alternative argument, it is also contended that the petitioners having accepted compensation in terms of the decision of the Government pursuant to recommendation of