THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.24874 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for payment of compensation and exgratia for the death of his son, as illegal and arbitrary. It appears, while the son of the petitioner was working as a labourer in the fields of one Baleboina Yaladri on 25.06.2008, he died due to electrocution. According to the petitioner, his son died only due to negligence on the part of the respondent authorities and, therefore, he approached the respondent authorities on several occasions, requesting them to grant the exgratia and also to pay the compensation for the untimely death of his son, but all his efforts proved futile. The petitioner ultimately submitted a representation dated 26.07.2008 to the respondents for payment of compensation and exgratia, but no action was taken in the matter. Hence, this writ petition. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 2 to 4, it is stated that the exgratia is paid if the accidents occur due to break downs, protection failures etc., but in the present case, the casuality occurred due to mishandling of electricity overhead line unauthorisedly by the deceased, due to which he came in contact with the live overhead line conductor and died on the spot, and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any exgratia. It is also stated that this writ petition is not maintainable, as there are disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated in the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the occurrence of accident in question and death of the son of the petitioner due to electrocution are not in dispute, as such, the petitioner is automatically entitled for compensation for the death of his son aged 21 years at the time of accident. In support of his case, he relied on the instructions issued by the Chairman and Managing Director of Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited, Hyderabad, in C.O.O.CGM (HRD) Ms.No.465, dated 29.09.2007, whereby the exgratia amount was revised and enhanced from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- w.e.f. 17.07.2007 in respect of Electrical Fatal Accident to Non-Departmental persons (Adult & Minor). Learned Standing Counsel for A.P. Transco appearing for respondents 2 to 4 submits that the son of the petitioner died because of his own negligence, but not due to the negligence on the part of the respondents and as such, the petitioner is not entitled for any exgratia. The fact that the son of the petitioner died due to electrocution on 25.06.2008 is not in dispute, and the only dispute raised by the respondents, by way of filing the counter, is that the son of the petitioner died because of his own negligence. Whether there was negligence on the part of the deceased or not cannot be dealt with in a proceedings of this nature. In fact, this aspect was already considered in a writ petition being W.P.No.6106 of 2002, which was disposed of by order dated 21.11.2007, wherein it is stated as under: “Admittedly, after the accident in question, the Assistant Divisional Engineer conducted an enquiry and submitted his report vide letter dated 02.04.2000, wherein it is clearly stated that due to wind on 1.4.2000 morning hours the L.T. line neutral wire was snapped and fell on the ground and the deceased came in contact with the fallen wire while passing through the field and got electrocuted. The contention of the respondents that if the deceased would have observed the fallen wire, the incident could not have occurred, cannot be accepted, for more than one reason, inasmuch as it is the duty of the concerned filed staff to be vigilant and patrol the H.T lines. Thus, the death of the husband of the petitioner due to electrocution is established and the respondent company cannot escape from its liability to pay just exgratia to the petitioner, being widow of the deceased. Hence, having regard to the fact that the deceased was aged 39 years at the time of accident and died leaving behind wife and two minor children, and following the judgment of the Apex Court in Parvati Devi case (cited supra), this Court is of considered opinion that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- would be a just exgratia in the present case. Since, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is already paid to the petitioner, the respondents are directed to pay the balance amount of Rs.80,000/- to the petitioner, within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” In view of above, I am of the considered opinion that the instructions issued in C.O.O.CGM (HRD) Ms.No.465 dated 29.09.2007, with regard to enhancement of exgratia, do not place any embargo as to examining of negligence. Therefore, the petitioner, being the father of the deceased, is entitled for grant of exgratia of Rs.1,00,000/- from the respondent organization, for the death of his son occurred on account of electrocution, and the respondents are directed to pay the same to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU,J 01.12.2010 Note: Issue CC in one week B/o v v