WP(C) 4809/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY This petition is filed seeking compensation on account of the electricution deat h of Padum Saikia on 14.8.2009 while he was bicycling to his place of business ( a tea stall) when he came in contact with a live electric wire lying on the publ ic road at Madhupur village. 2. The report of the Senior Electrical Inspector in the Kamalpur P. S. U/D Case No.9/2009 gives the following relevant information on the circumstances of the accident: 13) Causes Leading to the Accident: From the facts and findings, it is opined t hat contact of the live conductor with the body parts of the victim caused the a ccident. Had appropriate and proper maintenance measures been taken for clearing bamboo o r other trees near the overhead line and had the line properly been protectively guarded, the accident resulting to death of Late Padum Saikia would not have ta ken place. 14) Contraventions: From the facts and circumstances leading to the accident , it appears that there occurred violation of rule 29 & 91(1) of the Indian Elec tricity Rules, 1956 on part of the supplier of the electric distribution line i. e. Lower Assam Electricity Distribution Company Limited. 15) Recommendation: The safety provisions of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1 956 should be strictly complied with by the owner of the supply lines. It is sug gested that time to time thorough checking of electric lines be done by owner of such lines and any dilution/deviation in the safety performance of the same at any time and by any one should be appropriately dealt for correction and sustena nce of such corrections under provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Ru les made there under in force from time to time, to ensure Public Safety . 3. As can be seen from the report, it is on account of the fault of the sup plier i.e. Lower Assam Electricity Distribution Company Limited, the fatal elect rical accident occured. 4. The petitioners who are the surviving family of late Padum Saikia had ma de a representation to the Distribution Company on 12.10.2009 claiming compensat ion of Rs.10,00,000/-. But since offer made by the Company in October 2009 to th e wife of the deceased was found unacceptable, the petitioners have approached t he Court. 5. Mr. D Bhattacharjya, learned standing counsel for the respondent Company submits that an O. M. dated 22.12.2008 covers the quantum of compensation payab le for fatal electrical accidents and considering that the victim was aged about 50 years, a sum of Rs.1.5 lakhs is only payable as per the quantum prescribed i n the O. M. dated 22.12.2008. 6. Considering that a formal notification has been issued specifying the ex -gratia amount payable for fatal accidents, I am of the view that no higher amou nt can be considered by the Court since soon after the accident had taken place on 14.8.2009, the respondents had offered the compensation to the petitioner wit hout any undue delay. 7. Accordingly this case is disposed of by directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner No.1 an amount of Rs.1.5 lakhs as per their offer letters dat ed 29.10.2009 and 30.11.2009 respectively. The deceased’s wife (petitioner No.1) upon proper identification may receive the offered amount of Rs.1.5 lakhs withi n 2 (two) weeks from today. The respondents would facilitate the petitioner to r eceive the payment without any difficulty. 8. Notwithstanding this order, if the petitioners wish to make any higher c laim against the respondents by showing the actual loss suffered by the family, that option is kept open for them in an appropriate proceeding. 9. The petition is disposed of accordingly. 10. A copy of the O. M. dated 22.12.2008 be kept with the case record.