IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:- 24 .10.2008 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN W.P.No.11766 OF 1999 T.M.Kamalanathan ..Petitioner -Vs.- 1. Government of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary to Social Welfare Department Fort St.George Chennai-9. 2. The District Collector Vellore District, Vellore. 3. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board rep.by its Chairman 800, Anna Salai, Chennai-2. 4. The Superintending Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vellore Electricity Distribution Circle Vellore. 5. The Superintendent of Police Vellore District Vellore. 6. The Sub-Inspector of Police Vellore South Police Station Bagayam Out Post, Vellore. ..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakhs as compensation to the petitioner and to take both departmental and criminal action against respondents 2 to 6 and award cost. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ajay Khose For Respondents : Mr.P.Subramanian, AGP for RR1,2,5 and 6 Mr.A.Selvendran for RR3 & 4. ---------- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R This writ petition has been preferred for issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakhs as compensation to the petitioner on account of the unfortunate death of his son by way of electrocution and to take both departmental and criminal action against respondents 2 to 6 for their negligence. 2. The factual matrix necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are as under:- Petitioner's case:- The petitioner is a tea shop owner and his shop is located at No.79, Azad Road, Thorappadi, Vellore about 100 metres away from his house. The petitioner had one son and two daughters and he was maintaining the family with the meagre income derived from the tea shop. While so, the Tamil Nadu Noon Meals Employees State Conference was organised in Vellore under the leadership of Tmt.Indira Kumari, the then Minister for Social Welfare, Government of Tamil Nadu. All the preparatory and decorative works were started and carried out even ten days before the date of the convention. Since the Chief Minister was to be the Chief Guest of the said conference, organisers had arranged massive and festive decorations to felicitate her visit. They have put casuarina barricade on both sides of the road from Thorappadi to the venue of the conference at Vellore. They have also put up number of decorative arches, banners, paintings, boards, illuminary, flourecent and fancy decorative lights on both sides of the road. The organisers have also put up tube lights on casuarina poles for every ten feet on both sides of the road covering the entire stretch of the road from Thorappadi to Vellore. Further they have also pasted decorative colour papers on thin iron ropes/wires and tied them with the casuarina poles. All the lights were put on from the morning itself on 6.12.1995 before the arrival of the then Chief Minister at Thorappadi by helicopter. Electricity supply for the lights were directly taken from the street lines and with the full connivance of the Government officials. 3. As scheduled, the Chief Minister arrived attended the function and after the conclusion of the meeting, the Chief Minister returned to Thorappadi by car and then proceeded to Chennai by helicopter. The Honouarble Chief Minister crossed the Azad road at about 5.00 p.m. and on hearing the noise of the helicopter, the only son of the petitioner by name Dinakaran, aged nine years, left the house and came towards the tea shop of the petitioner at Azad Road with an anxiety to see the then Chief Minister. The petitioner's son entered the Azad Road and when he was just four shops away from the tea shop of the petitioner, the decorative colour papers pasted in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ iron rope/wire hanging from the casuarina pole obstructed and rolled down in his foot and he was pulled down on the floor with heavy shakes and shivering. The child cried and shouted for help and on hearing the noise, the petitioner rushed to the spot to rescue his son. When the petitioner tried to remove the iron wire rolled down in his son's foot believing that it was only an ordinary decorative iron wire, the petitioner experienced heavy electric shock and before realising that electricity was passing through the decorative iron wire, he was thrown away on the floor and became unconscious. He regained his consciousness only in Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore after four days of the incident and only thereafter the petitioner came to know as to what had really happened on 6.12.1995 as well as the instantaneous death of his son in the said incident. 4. The petitioner was informed that his son was also taken to the Christian Medical College Hospital in a van by a Security Officer posted for the security of the then Chief Minister and after arrival at the hospital, the petitioner's son was declared dead. The petitioner also sustained electric burn injuries in his right wrist, left arm, chest and scapular region and he was an inpatient in the hospital from 6.12.1995 to 16.12.1995. Subsequently plastic surgery was done to cure the burn injuries by grafting the flesh from his thigh. 5. The accident was an unexpected event in the family and the petitioner was not having any income for the maintenance of the family and he had faced untold suffering and hardship for mobilising money to meet out the expenses for post-mortem and funeral expenses for his son as well as for his medical treatment. With much difficulty the wife of the petitioner arranged money by taking loan on heavy interest. The matter was reported to the police and a case in Crime No.1156 of 1995 was registered before the Vellore South Police Station at Bagayam Out Post. The post-mortem report of the minor declared that the child died of cardiagenic shock due to electrocution. Similarly in the discharge summary issued to the petitioner by the Christian Medical College, it has been stated that the petitioner sustained electric burns while trying to rescue his eight years old son, who had caught in a live wire and the petitioner had sustained burns in his right hand, left arm, chest as well as in scapular region. 6. The wife of the petitioner made a representation dated 12.12.1995 to the Chief Minister's Special Grievance Cell for suitable action as well as for payment of compensation with a copy to the District Collector, Vellore. Since there was no reply to the representation, the petitioner's wife again made a representation to the Chief Minister on 6.3.1996, but no reply has been received. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ However, ultimately a sum of Rs.10,000/- was paid by the District Collector, Vellore as compensation from the Chief Minister's General Relief Fund, but with that meagre amount the petitioner was not in a position to repay the borrowed amount of Rs.30,000/- on interest, which was spent for the purpose of treatment. 7. The incident took place only due to the negligence of the respondents towards public safety. The respondents have failed to confirm and ensure as to whether the required safety and precautionary measures had been followed and adopted in putting up various decorative structures and lights by the organisers of the conference before granting permission for putting up such structures and before giving electricity connection for other electrical fittings. According to the petitioner, the incident was solely on account of the negligence of the respondents and as such the respondents are bound to pay compensation for the unfortunate death of his son as well as injury caused to the petitioner and accordingly, he has filed the present writ petition. Defence:- 8. The District Collector, Vellore had filed counter affidavit on behalf of all the respondents wherein it was admitted that the conference on 6.12.1995 was convened by the Tamil Nadu Noon Meals Employees Association and the Honourable Chief Minister participated in the said function as Chief Guest. The organisers have also erected casuarina poles on either side of the road and the same were tied with small iron rope from Helipad to Fort Maidan and were provided with decorative disco papers. Such arrangements have been made only by the then ruling political party cadres and neither the Noon Meal Employees nor any other departmental staffs were involved in carrying out those arrangements. After the function was over, the then Chief Minister left Vellore and subsequently the public gathered there tried to remove the casuarina poles for their own use. While the mob was trying to remove the casuarina poles, a small iron rope pasted with decorated disco paper tied to one of the casuarina pole was cut and touched the live line. Temporary electricity supply has been effected in two places in the name of the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Vellore to illuminate the conference area. The tragic incident involving the petitioner and his son happened only on account of the action of the public in removing the casuarina poles. 9. From the complaint preferred before the police as well as from the post-mortem report it was confirmed that the petitioner's son died due to electric shock. The petitioner also suffered minor injuries but his son died on the spot. The decorations using casuarina poles and iron ropes were not arranged by the District Administration and as such the District Administration was in no way https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ connected with the said arrangement. The arrangement was made by the then ruling political party cadres without obtaining permission from the District authorities. After receiving information about the accident, the District Administration instructed the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to cut off the supply immediately and accordingly the supply was cut off in that area to avoid any further casualty among the public. Since the incident happened only on account of the mob action in removing the casuarina poles and the contact of the iron rope attached to the casuarina pole with the electricity line passing through that area, the respondents are not liable to pay compensation to the petitioner as they were no way responsible for the incident and accordingly, the second respondent has prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. Contentions:- 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the State is having an obligation to see that the public functions are conducted in an orderly manner and for conducting meetings prior permission of the District Administration was absolutely necessary. While permitting the Tamil Nadu Noon Meals Employees Association to conduct the conference at Vellore and for the said purpose to allow them to put casuarina poles on either side of the road, the respondents should have taken steps to avoid untoward incidents. Learned Counsel further contended that since the Chief Minister was participating in the function, the respondents should have anticipated that there would be large crowd in that area and as such they should have taken all the measures to see that no incident happens in that area in connection with the meeting. Since the respondents miserably failed to protect the life of the petitioner's son, the respondents cannot be heard to say that they are not liable to compensate the petitioner. 11. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that no liability could be fastened on the respondents inasmuch as the entire incident had happened only on account of the action taken by the members of a particular political party in connection with the arrangement made for the then Chief Minister and since the State was not in any way connected with the said function, the State is not liable to pay compensation to the petitioner. 12. I have considered the submission of the learned counsel and I have also gone through the pleadings as well as the materials available on record. Factual Analysis:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 13. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has clearly averred that all the preparatory and decorative works were started and carried out ten days before the date of convention, as the then Chief Minister was the Chief Guest for the function. It was the further case of the petitioner that the organisers have put up casuarina poles on both sides of the road from Thorappadi to the conference venue and they have also put up number of decorative arches, banners, paintings, boards, illuminary, flourecent and fancy lights on both sides of the road all along. There were casuarina poles for every ten feet on both sides of the road covering the entire stretch of the road and tube lights were put on those casuarina poles. There was no denial of any of these averments in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. Therefore it is evident that the erection of casuarina poles on both sides of the road was not the act done on the day of the meeting but was done ten days before the convention. It is also not in dispute that temporary electricity connection was effected in two places in the name of the Public Works Department to illuminate the conference area. This fact clearly shows that the function was organised by none other than the Government as otherwise there was no necessity for the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department to take temporary supply from the electricity department to illuminate the conference area. 14. The authority to grant permission for conduct of public meetings as well as to permit the organisers to put up casuarina barricades on both sides of the road vests with the District Administration. The town Vellore is a Municipality and as such for putting up pandal or any other structure in a public street, permission of the Municipality has also to be taken. 15. Section 183 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act clearly provides that licence has to be taken from the Municipality for temporary erection of pandals and other structures in a public street vested in it on such terms and conditions and for such period. Sub-Section (4) of Section 183 provides that no licence shall be granted if the projection, construction or occupation is likely to be injurious to health or cause public inconvenience or otherwise materially interfere with the use of the road as such. Section 321 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act mandates the Executive Authority of the Municipality to inspect the place in respect of which a licence or permission was required under the Municipalities Act and to take action, in case the place was used without a licence and in the event of grant of a licence, to satisfy himself as to whether the licence conditions were contravened. The Collector has also got a supervisory role in respect of a Municipality as is evident from Sections 34 and 37 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 16. The counter affidavit filed by the second respondent clearly shows that there was no supervisory power exercised by the District Collector as well as the police in the conduct of the public function on 6.12.1995. There was no indication in the counter affidavit as to whether permission was taken by the Tamil Nadu Noon Meals Employees Association to conduct the public function on 6.12.1995 and for erecting casuarina poles on both sides of the road throughout the way travelled by the Chief Minister from Helipad to the place of conference. Therefore it is evident that the District Administration were silent spectators and even though no permission was sought for by the organisers, they were permitted to conduct the meeting as well as to erect casuarina poles touching the electricity lines. The Electricity Department was also at fault as they have not taken precautionary measures to see that none of the casuarina poles erected on the side of the road actually touched the electrical lines so as to become a source of danger to the public. The District Administration were aware that the dignitary to take part in the function was none other than the Chief Minister of the State and as such there would be big crowd to witness the function and to see the Chief Minister. The function was really an official function which was found from the averments in the counter affidavit about the electricity supply taken by the Executive Engineer to illuminate the conference area. In case conference was organised by the Tamil Nadu Noon Meal Employees only, there was no requirement for the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department to illuminate the conference area after taking temporary electricity connection from the electricity department. Therefore it was not a private function attended by the Chief Minister, but for all purposes it was only a public function. In any case, the District Administration as well as the Government cannot wash their hands by saying that the arrangements including the erection of casuarina poles were made by the political party cadres without obtaining any kind of permission from the District Authorities. The statement made by the District Collector to the effect that no permission was taken from the District Authorities clearly shows the dereliction of duty on the part of the District Administration. 17. Law is supreme and it is applicable to everybody whether it would be the members of the ruling party or opposition. When the statute prescribes that prior permission of the District Administration as well as police should be taken for conduct of public function and for erection of casuarina poles on the side of the road and also to make a hole in the street, such act should not have been permitted without taking permission from the authorities. In fact Section 186 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act clearly provides that no person shall make a hole or cause any obstruction in any street, unless, he previously obtains the permission of the Executive Authority and complies with such https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ conditions as that officer may impose. Section 186(2) also provides that in case of grant of permission to make a hole or cause obstruction in a street, such person shall, at his own expense cause such hole or obstruction to be sufficiently fenced and enclosed, until the hole or obstruction is filled up or removed and shall cause such hole or obstruction to be sufficiently lighted during the night. 18. No casuarina pole could be erected unless the organisers makes holes on the side of the road and the affidavit of the petitioner proceeds that there were casuarina poles in every ten feet on both sides of the road covering the entire stretch of the road travelled by the Honourable Chief Minister. These acts on the part of the organisers of the conference or by the officials of the Government cannot be done over night and it could have been done only in a couple of days. Therefore the District Administration cannot plead ignorance of the action taken by the organisers or by other concerned for putting up the casuarina poles as well as decorations using electricity. There is no factual dispute in the present matter with respect to the incident. It is an admitted position that the petitioner's son died of electrocution in the incident happened on 6.12.1995 and the petitioner also sustained injuries. The medical certificate as well as the post-mortem report clearly shows the cause of death and in fact the same has been admitted by the second respondent in the counter affidavit. 19. The respondents have not challenged the negligence as well as the quantum claimed by the petitioner and their only contention is that the District Administration was in no way responsible for the incident and as such they cannot be made liable for compensation. The inaction as well as dereliction of duty on the part of the District Administration as well as the other respondents are writ large. The second respondent has clearly admitted about the erection of casuarina poles on both sides of the road as well as putting up the tube lights on such poles and also the other illumination and fancy decorations done for the said conference. The fact that no permission was taken by the organisers as well as the ruling political party were also admitted by the District Administration. The electricity connection taken for illuminating the conference area by the Public Works Department has also been admitted in the counter affidavit. Therefore it is clear that the District Administration had their own part in the conduct of the function and though the function was styled as a State Conference of the Tamil Nadu Noon Meals Employees Association but in fact it was only an extended Government function. Even in case the District Administration has not taken part in the arrangement of the conference still they are liable as they have not discharged their duty and miserably failed to protect the life of the citizens. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 20. The District Collector has clearly admitted that no permission was taken from the District Administration for the meeting in question as well as for making arrangements for the function. The entire route travelled by the Chief Minister was decorated by putting up casuarina barrigates on both sides. It is evident that considerable damage has been done on both sides of the road. Without the knowledge of the District Administration no such work could have been carried out by the organisers of the function. The State Highway is maintained by the Public Works Department and the very permission for taking electricity connection was taken by the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department which is also a pointer to show that the entire function was arranged by none other than the Government machinery. Article 21:- 21. Right to life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is a valuable right available to a citizen. The State is under the legal obligation to protect the life and property of citizens and the State is also obliged to carry out the constitutional obligations. It should be the endeavour of the State as well as the authorities to protect the life of its citizens. It is also the duty of the State to avoid any of the circumstance or situation which would be a source of danger to the life of citizens. The State cannot be heard to say that since the act was on account of the mob, the State cannot be held liable or responsible for such action. The Government also cannot shift their responsibility by contending that the negligent act was done by the members of the ruling political party without taking permission from the District Administration. 22. The issue regarding the liability of the State in case of loss of life or damage to the property were considered by a Full Bench of this Court in P.P.M. THANGAIAH NADAR FIRM & 4 OTHERS v. THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND 3 OTHERS(2006(4) LAW WEEKLY 560) and after considering catena of decisions on the point, the Full Bench observed thus:- 25. Thus a conspectus of the decisions of several High Courts and even those of the Supreme Court makes it clear that it is the Constitutional obligation of the State to protect the life, liberty and property of a person and where the State, that is to say its machinery without any justification fails in such duty resulting in loss to a person the State cannot avoid its responsibility by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ taking refuge under a plea that the damage was done by the rioteers and not by State's machinery. 26. The allied question is the Forum where the remedy is to be sought for. This question is again a fiercely fought legal battle as evident from several decisions of various High Courts and the Supreme Court. The decisions already analysed indicate that depending upon the facts and circumstances, remedy can be sought for under the public law remedy concept by invoking jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 or even that of the Supreme Court under Article 32. 35. While considering the question of public law