M P STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS in both these writ petitions the factual matrix relates to singular accident and the order impugned is the same and the points of law involved being in same spectrum, they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order. For the sake of clarity and convenience the facts of W. P. No. 2165 of 2001 are adumbrated herein.

(2.) INVOKING the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, Jabalpur (in short 'the Board') and its functionaries, have prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 30. 10. 2000, Annexure P-5, passed by the Collector, Mandla, respondent No. 1 herein, and revenue recovery certificate, Annexure P-6, passed by the same authority and to grant such other reliefs as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) THE facts as have been unfolded are that the respondent No. 2, Janki Bai is the wife of late Prakash Barkade, and the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the children of the said deceased. The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 initiated a proceeding under Section 6 (1) of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') read with Section 6 (1) and 2 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 before the respondent No. 1 for grant of compensation for a sum of Rs. 5,70,000 along with interim compensation of Rs. 50,000. It was put forth in the application that the father of late Prakash Barkade, Jai Singh Barkade, was working in the agricultural field at about 5. 30 a. m. and at that juncture he came in contact with the telephone wire in which electric current was flowing. When he fell down his sons, namely, Kailash Barkade and Prakash Barkade, rushed immediately to rescue him and both the sons came in contact with the telephone wire and breathed their last. It is set forth in the writ petition that near the house of claimants there is a high tension line of the Board and above it there is telephone line and the same was broken on that day due to rust and came in contact with the electricity line as a result of which electric current started flowing in the telephone wire which resulted in the death of Prakash Barkade. In the application filed before the Collector it was stated that there was negligence on the part of the Board and hence, it is liable to pay compensation.