CWP No.11338 of 2008 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.11338 of 2008 Date of decision: April 28, 2009. Talvir Khan & Ors. ...Petitioner(s) v. Union of India & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Ghulam Nabi Malik, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Jagdish Marwaha, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioners seek a mandamus to direct the respondent- railway authorities to compensate them to the tune of Rs.10 lacs on account of the death of their father – Kewal Khan in a railway accident caused due to the sheer negligence of the railway authorities. The petitioners are four hapless minor children of Kewal Khan. They were born on 29.10.1991, 3.11.1994, 15.11.1998 and 2.6.1996 respectively. On 11.12.1998 at 23:04 hours, an accident occurred between passenger train No.6LJH and canter No.PB-11D-2637 at railway gate No.42-C between Malerkotla and Kup Kalan. The canter was being driven CWP No.11338 of 2008 -: 2 :- by the deceased father of the petitioners. The accident had occurred as the gateman at the railway crossing was allegedly under the influence of liquor and did not close the gate. The father of the petitioners received multiple injuries and died at the spot. FIR No.46 under section 337, 427, 304-A IPC read with Section 175 of the Railway Act (Annexure P-4) was registered at PS GRP Sangrur. The post mortem of the deceased was conducted and proceedings under section 174 Cr.P.C. were also initiated. The petitioners' miseries multiplied manifold when their mother also expired on 20.5.1999, being under depression, leaving behind the orphaned-petitioners, in the age- group of 8 to 1 years. The petitioners have now approached this Court through their maternal uncle seeking compensation on account of the death of their sole bread earner in the above mentioned railway accident. Notice of motion was issued and thereafter vide order dated March 04, 2009, the Chief Claims Officer, Northern Railways, New Delhi was directed to dispose of the petitioners' pending claim by passing a reasoned order. In deference thereto, the railway authorities have passed and placed on record the order dated 2.4.2009, in which the petitioners' entitlement to claim compensation has been principally accepted but the award of compensation to them has been left to the discretion of this court. Learned Counsel for the parties have been heard at some length and the records perused. Learned Counsel for the Respondents submits that the petitioners' claim is hopelessly time barred as the period of limitation prescribed under Section 17(1)(b) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act has CWP No.11338 of 2008 -: 3 :- already expired. I, however, do not find any merit in the said contention. The petitioners are admittedly minors and none of them has attained majority till date. The limitation period, if any, has not started running against them. Otherwise also, such like technicalities cannot impinge upn the jurisdiction of a writ court. His second contention that the petitioners' claim in any case is barred by the principles of delay and laches which are oftenly applied by a writ court, also deserves to be rejected. The petitioners lost their father at a very tender age and soon thereafter their mother also passed away. The petitioners have been somehow sustaining at the mercy of their relatives. The writ petition has been filed by them through their maternal uncle, who appears to be from a poor and backward section of the society. No legal technicalities, therefore, can obstruct the flow of delayed justice to which the petitioners are entitled at the earliest. The relief sought by the petitioners has its genesis in Article 21 of the Constitution which cannot be paralyzed by any Parliamentary legislation. The question as to whether or not the respondents are liable to pay compensation to the petitioners need not be delve into detail for the reasons already assigned by a Division bench of this Court in CWP No.16927 of 2006 (Satyabir and others v. Union of India & Ors.), decided on 25.4.2008. For the reasons afore-stated,the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay compensation of Rs.1 lac to each of the petitioners, i.e., Rs.4 lacs in total. The amount of compensation shall be kept in fix deposits in a nationalized bank in the petitioners' respective names till each one of them attains majority. The petitioners through their guardian shall be entitled to draw the interest on the fix deposits to be spent CWP No.11338 of 2008 -: 4 :- on the petitioners' welfare. The amount of compensation shall be paid to the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which the petitioners shall also be entitled to interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing this writ petition till actual realization thereof. Dasti. April 28, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge