O R D E R

The Writ of Compensation has been filed seeking a sum of Rs.75,00,000/-

towards compensation for the death of a person, who is aged about 43 years due to electrocution.

2. The writ petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased, more specifically, his wife, mother and children. The deceased husband of the first writ petitioner viz., Late. Sengodan was an Engineering Gradutate in B.E. Mechanical Engineering and was working as Production Engineer in G.T.P. Granites Limited and he was drawing a salary of Rs.23,100/- at the time of his death. The family is owning agricultural lands in Gopinathapuram Village. He was carrying on agricultural activities in the said lands. On 26.09.2018, when the husband of the 1st writ petitioner was irrigating the turmeric plants in the lands in Survey No.95/3A in Gopinathapuram Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District, he came to contact with the stay wire supporting the electric post, situated in their lands and was electrocuted.

3. The writ petitioners state that the electric post and stay wire were badly maintained by the respondents / Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, which caused the death of the husband of the 1st writ petitioner. Relying on the said incident, the learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated that it is the case of the negligence on the part of the Board authorities and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for a compensation of Rs.75,00,000/-. In support of the said contention, the salary certificate of the deceased person was produced. It is further contended that the family of the writ petitioners own agricultural lands and getting income from and out of the agricultural produces. Therefore, the compensation claimed in the Writ Petition is just and is to be considered.

4. It is contended that the death due to electrocution was established beyond any pale of doubt and considering the status of the deceased, the compensation is to be calculated by adopting multiplier under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

5. The learned counsel for the respondents objected the said contention by stating that the electrocution and the death of the person is an unfortunate event, but the negligence on the part of the Board authorities is to be established through evidence. The analysis of the accident and findings of the Investigating Officer, as furnished by the respondents would reveal as follows:-

“ On 26.10.2018 at about 08:30 hrs a Non-Departmental, Fatal, Electrical accident occurred to one Thiru M.Sengodan (Aged 45 years) S/o. Muthu Gopinathapuram, Omalur Tk, Salem Dt., feeding supply from Sakkarachettipatty SS VI / 200 KVA/ 22KV Sengaradu feeder of Karuppur110/22KVSS. The accident occurred to Thiru M.Sengodan, S/o Muthu (45years) while trying to climb from his agricultural field (which is 3 feet down from road) by holding the stay wire in the field the guy shackle was broken and the stay wire might have touched the jumper and got electric shock. The casuality got electric shock from LT line stay wire and fell down. The casuality died on the way to the hospital for treatment. He may be met with an electrical accident while climbing from his agricultural field to the road side and the stay wire may swing and the guy shackle insulator may be broken due to his load and the stay wire touches the LT phase of jumper resulting with electricution.”

6. The claim of the writ petitioners seeking compensation of Rs.75,00,000/- and the report submitted by the respondents are to be construed as disputed facts between the parties. Therefore, an adjudication is to be conducted to ascertain the facts and circumstances, so as to quantify the just compensation.

7. High Court in exercise of powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot conduct a roving enquiry in such issues, where evidences are to be examined with reference to the documents and other factors. Mere assumption in this regard would be insufficient to quantify the compensation to be paid to the legal heirs of the d