Civil Writ Petition No. 999 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 999 of 2009 Date of Decision: 10.12.2009 Happy …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1. Mr. Pavit Singh Mattewal, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) It is stated in the writ petition that when the petitioner was a child aged less than 13 years, he suffered electrocution from the live wires as a result thereof, his hands were amputated. Petitioner has shown a certificate issued by the office of Civil Surgeon, Gurdaspur, wherein photo has been also annexed. From the photograph, it is apparent that at the time of incident, petitioner was a child. The incident in the present case had taken place in February 1996 and petitioner was given treatment by Dr.Hardip Salaria, in support of this, petitioner has relied upon one prescription slip (Annexure P1) dated 15.2.1996. It is further averred in the writ petition that petitioner was referred to Guru Civil Writ Petition No. 999 of 2009 2 Ram Das Hospital, Research & Medical Institute, Amritsar, where he remained admitted from 21.2.1996 to 23.3.1996. Petitioner was also taken to All India Institute of Medical Sciences Hospital, New Delhi, for further treatment. Petitioner has relied upon Out Patient Department Card dated 9.7.1996 in support of the assertion made. Counsel for the petitioner has urged that Kanta Devi, mother of the petitioner had expired on 14.9.1995 and he was abandoned by his father in 1997 and the petitioner was supported by local N.G.O. Therefore, he could not approach any Court for grant of compensation. Counsel for the petitionee has relied upon Manjit Singh Sawhney v. Union of India 2005(4) Recent Civil Reports 547 to say that petitioner cannot be non-suited on the ground of delay and laches. It is submitted that delay and laches are merely rule of practice and cannot be prescribed as a binding rule of limitation. In the present case, when the incident took place, petitioner was a child. His mother expired and father had abandoned him. A detailed enquiry is required to be held as to how the incident took place and how much compensation, petitioner is entitled to. For determination of the fault and the amount to be awarded, evidence is required to be adduced by the parties. In Manjit Singh Sawhney's case (supra), it was held that for breach of public duty, for loss of limb, compensation can be awarded to the victim. The writ Court normally shall refrain from examining the witnesses and appreciating the evidence. Therefore, in these circumstances, Punjab State Human Rights Commission is requested to hold an enquiry and determine whether the Electricity Board is liable or Civil Writ Petition No. 999 of 2009 3 not, if so, what should be the quantum of compensation to be paid to the petitioner. Till the enquiry is held, as an interim measure, Punjab State Electricity Board is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner. The file of the case will be sent to the Punjab State Human Rights Commission with a request to hold an enquiry, as observed in this order. Parties shall appear before the Punjab State Human Rights Commission on 14.1.2010 at 10.00 a.m. In view of the observations made above, present writ petition is disposed of. However, the parties will be at liberty to avail their lawful remedy in case they are not satisfied with the findings returned by the Punjab State Human Rights Commission. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge December 10, 2009 “DK”