STATE OF KERALA Vs. THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal has been filed by the State of Kerala challenging the judgment dated 24.09.2013 passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 23210 of 2014. Learned Single Judge by the aforesaid judgment has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the State of Kerala against the order passed by the Kerala State Human Rights Commission (for short, "the Commission") directing payment of compensation. Brief facts giving rise to the Writ Appeal are: Two minor children, namely, Baby Shaniba, aged 7 years, D/o. Abubekar Sidhique and Ramseena, aged 4 years, D/o. Abdul Rahim met with an unnatural death on 15.06.2007 while they fell into a quarry which was open and flooded. The newspaper, Malayala Manorama daily dated 16.06.2007 published the above news item. The Commission initiated suo motu proceedings on the basis of the newspaper report dated 16.06.2007. In the suo motu proceedings, statements were submitted by the owner of the quarry as well as the Geologist, Mining and Geology Department, Kasaragod. The police had also registered a case as Crime No. 425 of 2007 under S. 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Commission found the quarry owner as well as the Mining and Geology Department as negligent and directed for payment of compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the proportion of Rs. 50,000/- by the owner of the quarry and Rs. 50,000/- by the Mining and Geology Department to the legal heirs of the deceased children. The Government was directed to make the above payment to the legal heirs and recover it from the owner of the quarry and Officers of the Mining and Geology Department. The said order was issued by the Commission on 20.03.2012. Writ Petition No. 23210 of 2013 was filed by the State in this Court on 23.09.2013. Learned Single Judge by his order dated 24.9.2013 refused to entertain the Writ Petition observing that the State has stated no reasons for approaching this Court with the inordinate delay of 1 1/2 years. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, this Writ Appeal has been filed.

(2.) We have heard Shri P.I. Davis, learned Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel appearing for private respondents.

(3.) Learned Government Pleader in support of the appeal raised the following submissions: (i) Learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the Writ Petition on the ground of laches whereas the Court ought to have proceeded to decide the case on merit. (ii) The Commission without directing and conducting an enquiry has passed the order dated 20.03.2012 which is not in accordance with the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (for short, "Act 1993"). (iii) The Commission neither issued any notice nor gave opportunity to the Officers of the Mining and Geology Department which violates the provisions of S. 16 of Act, 1993. (iv) The Commission has no jurisdiction to pass order for payment of compensation and it can at best only make recommendation. (v) The Commission could have only directed payment of compensation by the quarry owner who was to compensate for all damages and injury as per the terms and conditions of the permit and no compensation could have been directed to be paid by the Government.