LAWS(P&H)-2018-4-63

LAKHWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Decided On April 17, 2018
LAKHWINDER SINGH Appellant
V/S
State of Punjab and Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus seeking a direction to the respondents to pay compensation on account of unnatural death of his wife and the child in her womb due to lightning.

(2.) In brief, the petitioner has averred that he is working as a labourer at a brick-kiln. On 18.01.2009, his wife, while she was working, died because of lightning. The petitioner made an application to the Deputy Commissioner, Tarn Taran for seeking financial help alleging that he is an extremely poor person, having two small kids, aged about 3 years and 1- years and that his wife has died, having been struck by lightning and is not in a position to maintain his family alone. The said application was moved on 15.01.2009, on which the Deputy Commissioner passed the order on 10.02.2009 "report immediately after verifying the facts" and in turn, the SDM, Tarn Taran further passed the order to take immediate action. After getting the information, the Deputy Commissioner wrote to the Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister on 25.03.2010 that the village panchayat has also supported the case of the petitioner for payment of compensation and even the Minister of Rural and Panchayat Development has also asked him to take immediate action on the application of the petitioner who is asking for compensation on account of his extremely poor financial condition but since no reply was received, therefore, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner, in which the respondents have filed their reply that no compensation can be given to the petitioner because lightning is not included in the list of natural calamities and has made a reference to the Memo No.5/4/13-6/D.M.1/3291 dated 04.03.2013, in which the following has been observed:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the only reason for which the respondents have declined to grant compensation is that the death due to lightning or the lightning itself is not included in the list of natural calamities. It is argued that the death caused by lightning is a common phenomena which causes causalities, more in the rural area where the farmers are in more vulnerable condition. He has further submitted that the deaths due to lightning are usually single events and only in a very rare case it does affect the people in groups like the other natural calamities viz. cyclone, drought, earthquake, fire, flood, tsunami, hailstorm, landslide, avalanche, cloud burst, pest attack, cold wave and frost etc. which affect the people at large, therefore, perhaps it has not been considered to be a natural calamity for paying compensation.