GIRIDHARI MISHRA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation with the prayers to (i) direct/ order that each Grama Panchayat shall be taken as a unit for the purpose of assessment of crop yield or loss caused to the farmers due to natural calamities, (ii) direct/order that an independent enquiry shall be conducted to assess the loss sustained by the petitioners' village due to natural calamities from the year 1999 till date, (iii) direct/order that the petitioners shall be paid compensation by settling their insurance claims either individually or as a unit on Grama Panchayat basis to compensate the loss caused to their crops due to natural calamities, and (iv) pass such other orders/ direction as this Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. Petitioners' case in a nut-shell is that they are the residents of the villages of Barasara and Govindpur of Govindpur Grama Panchayat of Tihidi Block in the district of Bhadrak. They have challenged the illegal action of the opposite parties in not settling their claims and not paying them the compensation for loss of crops grown by them on account of natural calamities. The petitioners had grown paddy by obtaining agricultural loan as per the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme. The crops grown by them were insured compulsorily and the petitioners had paid insurance premium through their Bankers, i.e. the Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Balasore. However, their insurance claims have not been settled though they have incurred loss in yielding their crops. Hence, the present writ petition.

(2.) Mr. J. Nayak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are small farmers and they maintain their livelihood mostly by growing paddy. The agricultural fields in the aforesaid villages are rain fed as no irrigation facility is provided to them. In case of heavy rain fall, their agricultural fields are flooded out and in case of low rain fall they will be subjected to loss on account of drought. In the year 1999 as Scheme namely, National Agricultural Insurance Scheme was introduced by the Government of India through the concerned State Governments for insuring the crops grown by the farmers. Both loanee and non-loanee are eligible to avail the benefits under the aforesaid scheme. Under the said Scheme, comprehensive risk insurance is provided to cover yield losses arisen due to non-preventable risks, such as flood, drought, cyclone and typhoon. It was decided to operate the Scheme on the basis of "Area approach" for wide spread calamities and on an individual basis for localized calamities. The petitioners are growing paddy by obtaining agricultural loan from the Balasore District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Credit Cards have been issued in their favour for the purpose. While obtaining their loans, they are compelled to insure the crops and to pay the insurance premium. From the year 1999, till date the petitioners have been losing about 50% to 75% of their crops each year due to natural calamities. However, they have not been compensated for the losses they have suffered though they have insured the crop and paid the insurance premium. As per the National Agricultural Insurance Scheme, defined area of notified crops for widespread calamities was taken as a unit for deciding the insurance claim of that area. In the State of Odisha, each Block has been taken as a Unit i.e. as the "Defined Area" for paddy crops. In view of such area approach, if any individual farmer or any independent villager suffers loss due to any wide-spread calamity such as drought, flood, etc. such individual farmer or individual villager will not be entitled to get the insurance claim. For enabling the farmers to get the insurance claim, the State Government have to declare the entire Block area as affected area, so that all the farmers in that defined area will be eligible to get the insurance claim. In view of such wrong area approach, the petitioners are not able to get their legitimate insurance claims though actually they have suffered loss of about 5.0% to 75% of their crops on account of widespread calamities. In Tihidi Block of Bhadrak District, most of the agricultural lands are covered by irrigation facilities. Such irrigation facilities have not been extended to the petitioners' villagers. In case of drought in the entire area, most of the agricultural fields are provided with irrigation facilities except some few villages like that of the petitioners in the Block. The State Government, therefore, are not declaring the entire Block, i.e. the "defined area" under the Scheme as the drought affected areas. However, the petitioners reliably learn and verily believe that the revenue authorities on proper verification have declared the villages of the petitioners as drought affected areas and they have measured the loss to the extent of 50% to 75%, but on account of non-declaration of the affected area as 'defined area', the petitioners are unable to get their legitimate rights of insurance claims.

(3.) It was incumbent upon the State Government to declare any area as a Unit. Clause 9 of the Scheme is crystal clear that the "Defined Area" or a Unit may be a Grama Panchayat/Mandal/Circle/Block or Taluk. In the instant case, had the unit or defined area been a Grama Panchayat or a particular circle, the petitioners would have been able to get their insurance claim. However, as the entire Block area has been taken as a single unit, the petitioners have been deprived of getting their legitimate insurance claims only the petitioners' villages have been affected while other places in the Block to which irrigation facilities are provided have not been affected. Therefore, the right approach would be to settle the claim on an individual basis instead of deciding the claim on "Area approach" specifically when premiums have been collected by the insurance company on an individual basis while advancing agricultural loans on each Kisan Credit Card.