R GANDHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a public interest litigation instituted by the two Secretaries of the Indian Association of Lawyers (Tamil Nadu Chapter) and two students of the B.L. class, who are interested in the welfare of the community and participate in the Free Legal Aid and Advice Centre seeking redress for the trials and tribulations undergone by the minority Sikh Community of Coimbatore in Tamil Nadu and a few others in the wake of assassination of Srimathi Indira Gandhi on 31st October, 1984.

(2.) The brief facts set out in the affidavit in support of this petition are these. As an aftermath of the unfortunate and dastardly assassination of Srimathi Indira Gandhi there were unfortunate incidents in the country affecting the Sikh Community in particular and a series of incidents took place at Coimbatore. Miss Geetha Ramaseshab, an advocate of this Bar and one of the Joint Secretaries of the Indian Association of Lawyers (Tamil Nadu Chapter) visited Coimbatore on the 15th and 16th November, 1984, made an on-the-spot inspection and enquiry and gave a report to the Indian Association of Lawyers (Tamil Nadu Chapter) which is annexed to this petition. The report gives a graphic description of the extent of the injuries inflicted on the members of the Sikh Community in Coimbatore with reference to their properties and seriously affecting their business and avocation besides causing damage to their place of worship. The members of the Sikh Community in particular have suffered privations of a horrendous character for no fault of theirs. These incidents at Coimbatore have also taken a toll of the properties of some members belonging to other communities as well. There have been violations of several essential provisions of Constitution, which envisages a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic and assures to its citizens, justice, social, economic, and political. These incidents violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under Arts.14, 19(1)(e) and (g) and 21 of the Constitution. They are deprived of the Constitutional protection guaranteed under Art.300(A) of the Constitution of India. According to the petitioner, it is the bounden duty of the State in the interests of secularism to come to the speedy aid of the affected persons and rehabilitate them in a substantial measure. Under Art.38 of the Constitution, the State is bound to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political shall inform all the institutions of the National Life. This is the only ultimate guarantee of maintenance of secularism which is the sheet-anchor for the protection and preservation of the unity and integrity of the country. The petitioners have, therefore, prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order and direction in the nature of writ under Art.226 of the Constitution appointing a panel of Commissioners consisting of a senior District Judge and competent technical personnel to report on the incidents which took place on 31st October 1984 and on the subsequent dates and submit concrete proposals for the rehabilitation of the members of the Sikh community and others affected thereby.

(3.) The Collector of Coimbatore under instructions from the State Government has conducted an enquiry into the loss and damage suffered by the individuals in these violent incidents at Coimbatore and submitted a report dated 11-02-1985. The learned Government Pleader has produced this report before me. It contains a tabular statement containing the location of the building, the name of the owner of the building, community to which he belongs, the name of the occupier, his community, the estimated value of damages to the buildings as by the Public Works Department, the particulars of damages as assessed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, the loss as estimated by the Police, loss as per the report of the Fire Officer, the loss as claimed by the affected parties and finally his remark wherein he has fixed the compensation payable to the individuals after taking into account the insurance amounts paid to them. There are 34 cases out of which in one (item 25) there was no damage to the building but only to the account books and no compensation was recommended by the Collector. In another case (item 34) no relief was recommended by the Collector since the claimant has got compensation from the Insurance Company in full. In respect of the other 32 cases he has made clear recommendations for payment of compensation in each individual case either for the loss of goods or for damages to the building. The total amount of compensation as recommended by the Collector comes to Rs. 33,19,033/-.