DHARMI DEVI Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOUR real brothers Baldev Singh, Chatter Singh, bharat Singh and Kesho Ram residing in Villages maligam Sonu and Basu Luroo (Neel) of Tehsil Banihal district Doda, who are stated to be the members of the village Defence Committee, were killed in the intervening night of 6th/7th of January, 2002 when militants operating in the area had attacked their houses. Petitioner No. 1, their mother, petitioner No. 3, the widow of Baldev Singh, who had left behind three daughters and two sons, petitioner No. 4, the widow of chatter Singh who had left behind three minor sons and petitioner No. 5, the widow of Bharat Singh who had left behind two minors had approached the respondents seeking release of ex-gratia relief which was payable to the Village Defence Committee members in terms of government orders issued by the Government in this behalf. They had requested the respondents to pay them additional ex-gratia relief for the damage caused to their property in the militants' attack, besides considering their engagement in Government Service on compassionate grounds. Petitioners' claim was not addressed to by respondent Nos. 1 and 2. It was only respondent No. 6 who is stated to have released ex-gratia relief of Rs. 1 lac to the next of the kins of each deceased. Aggrieved by the inaction and refusal of the respondents in discharging their statutory obligations, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking issuance of directions commanding the respondents to sanction and pay them ex-gratia relief of Rs. 2 lacs for the death of each person who had died in the militants attack, and compensation to petitioner No. 2 whose one eye had been completely damaged in the attack along with interest @ 12% per annum.

(2.) THE case set up by the petitioners in the writ petition is that the four persons who had died in the militants attack, were the members of the Village Defence committees which had been constituted pursuant to the orders issued by his Excellency, the Governor of the State in presence of other functionaries of the State on his excellency's visit in the area pursuant to the killings of 22 persons in and around Village Maligam Sonu in the intervening night of August, 2000 by the militants and the petitioners were entitled to ex-gratia relief in terms of government Order No. 762-GAD of 2001 dated 11. 07. 2001 and the cost of damage caused to their property because of the militants attack, besides compassionate appointments in Government Service in terms of the provisions of SRO 43 of 1994. To substantiate their plea that the four persons who had been killed, were the members of the Village Defence committee, the petitioners, besides producing the identity cards issued by the Police Department in favour of the deceased, acknowledging them to be the members of the Village Defence Committee, have stated that the deceased had been issued weapons and ammunition by the Police Department to work as the members of the village Defence Committee.

(3.) WHILE supporting petitioners' case, Deputy commissioner, Doda has submitted in his objections that Senior Superintendent of Police Ramban, respondent No. 4, had communicated him vide his communication No. VDC 731 dated 11. 1. 2001 that the four persons who had died in the militants attack of 6th/7th of January, 2002 were the members of the Village defence Committee and in that view of the matter their legal heirs were entitled to Rs. 2 lacs as ex-gratia relief for each victim but only an amount of Rs. 1 lac could be paid to them in view of respondent No. 4's subsequent communication No. Estt/794 dated 11. 1. 2002 whereby he had informed that the victims of the militants attack were not the members of the sanctioned Village Defence committee and were, therefore, required to be treated as locals of the area. Petitioners' case has been contested by Senior superintendent of Police Ramban, respondent No. 4, on the ground that four persons killed in the militants attack at Village Maligam Sonu and Village Basu Luroo (Neel) of Tehsil Banihal were not the members of the sanctioned Village Defence Committee and they were not thus entitled to the reliefs they seek through their writ petition. This respondent has, however, not denied issuance of identity cards and weapons to these four persons. Other respondents to the writ petition have opted not to file their response to the petitioners' writ petition.