STATE OF ODISHA Vs. RADHAKANTA TRIPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State, petitioners before Court. He submits, impugned is direction contained in communication bearing th action date 17/2/2020. He submits, the Commission exceeded its powers in directing Chief Secretary to Government of Odisha to pay compensation of Rs..00l lakh each to four deceased persons, who died of diarrhoea. He relies on Sec. 13 to 18 in Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 to submit, apart from anything else, the Chief Secretary ought to have been given opportunity of hearing. Simply issuance of show cause notice and rejection of the reply resulted in the communication. He submits further, under se ction 18 the Commission can only recommend but there has been direction to pay.

(2.) He draws attention to reply dtd. 30/10/2019 to the show cause and submits, inquiry by State revealed, the villagers had dug well. There was also a stream. They drank water from the well and stream. Examination of water collected from the well and stream revealed presence of modified virulent strain of vibro cholera. Apart from taking all steps to provide medical assistance to the villagers, the administration conducted group meeting and told the villagers not to drink from the well and stream. Also, continuation of tank and pipe water supply was directed. In the circumstances, the administration could not have been directed to pay compensation.

(3.) In spite of issuance and service of notice upon opposite party no.l, who was complainant before the Commission, said opposite party goes unrepresented.