STATE OF TRIPURA Vs. AMRITA BALA SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals being directed against a common judgement and order dated 07.12.2000 were heard analogously and are being disposed of by the present order.

(2.) The facts, in brief, may be noted at the outset. The two petitioners in the writ proceeding registered as Civil Rule No. 511 of 1996 were admitted in the B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital at Hapania, West Tripura on 17.6.1996. A cataract operation was performed Iin the left eye of each of the petitioners in the said hospital on 18.6.1996 and they were discharged from the hospital on 21.6.1996. The petitioner No. 1 in the connected writ proceeding, i.e., Civil Rule No. 557 of 1996 was admitted in the hospital on 18.6.1996 ; his left eye was operated on 19.6.1996 and he was discharged on 21.6.1996. Similarly, the petitioner No. 2 in the said writ proceeding was admitted in the hospital on 11.6.1996 ; her left eye was operated on 12.6.1996 and she was discharged on 24.6.1996 whereas the third petitioner was admitted in the hospital on 12.6.1996; her left eye was operated on 13.6.1996 and she was discharged from the hospital on 26.6.1996. According to the petitioners in both the writ petitions, their left eyes, on which operations were performed in the hospital were permanently damaged due to an infection suffered in the hospital. Accordingly, they have filed the writ petitions in question alleging violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and seeking, inter alia, compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 (Rupees two lakh) each for such violation. The learned Single Judge after hearing the writ petitions by a judgment and order dated 07.12.2000 came to the conclusion that the left eye of each of the five petitioners were damaged on account of infection suffered due to the operation performed in the hospital and that the said event amounted to a gross violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Article 21 of the Constitution. The learned Single Judge took the further view that the writ petitioners would be entitled to compensation of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand) each in addition to cost of litigation, which was quantified at Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) in favour of each of the petitioneRs. Aggrieved by the conclusions reached and the award of compensation made, the present appeals have been filed by the State.

(3.) We have heard Mr. U.B. Saha, learned senior Govt. Advocate, assisted by Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-writ petitioners (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners').