Gauhati High Court
Ratna Mandal vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 1 February, 2023
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No. 1/6
GAHC010113892021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3839/2021
RATNA MANDAL
W/O LATE RATAN MANDAL, VILL. RAJABARI, MISSION COMPOUND, P.O.
AND P.S. JORHAT, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN 785001
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF
ASSAM, REVENUE (R AND R) AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT.,
DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 781006
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN 785001
4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN 785001
5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
JORHAT EAST REVENUE CIRCLE
DIST. JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN 785001
6:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE
JORHAT POLICE STATION
Page No. 2/6
ASSAM
PIN 78500
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A MOBARAQUE
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 01-02-2023 Heard Mr. A. Mobaraque, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. P.R. Mahanta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 1; Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department for the respondent no. 2; and Mr. M. Chetia, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 3 - 6.
2. The petitioner has instituted this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking inter alia a direction to the State respondent authorities to disburse an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- in terms of a Notification dated 15.11.2014 of the Revenue & Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam claiming that the petitioner is one of the Next of Kins [NoKs] of the deceased person viz. Late Ratan Mandal. It is claimed that Late Ratan Mandal died in a road traffic accident occurred at a public place.
3. The petitioner has claimed to be the wife of the said deceased person, Late Ratan Mandal.
4. The case projected by the petitioner, in brief, is that at around 07-15 p.m. on 28.11.2016, the husband of the petitioner viz. Ratan Mandal was coming towards his residence on foot after closing his shop located at Titabor Borhola. When he was walking by the road, Jorhat Gorh Ali Road after getting down from a public transport vehicle, a two- wheeler bearing registration no. AS-03/S-9446 [Activa] coming from Jorhat side towards Chinamora road [Gorh Ali], in rash and negligent manner, knocked down Ratan Mandal from the backside. As a result of the accident, Ratan Mandal stated to have met instantaneous Page No. 3/6 death at the spot. It is stated that the Post-Mortem Examination [PME] on the dead body of Late Ratan Mandal was performed on 29.11.2016 at the Jorhat Medical College & Hospital [JMCH], Jorhat. As per the PME Report, the death was due to coma as a result of head injury. The PME Report had opined that the injuries sustained by the deceased were ante-mortem in nature and were caused by blunt force impact. In connection with the accident, a First Information Report [FIR] was lodged on 07.12.2016 and the said FIR was registered as Jorhat Police Station Case no. 2627/2016 under Sections 279/304A, IPC on 08.12.2016. The Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case after completing investigation in connection with Jorhat Police Station Case no. 2627/2016 had also submitted a charge-sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vide Charge-Sheet no. 47/2017 dated 31.01.2017 against the driver of the two- wheeler [Activa]. The Inspector, Traffic Branch, Jorhat Police Station had also issued a certificate in Form no. 54 recording details of the accident that occurred on 28.11.2016 resulting into the death of Ratan Mandal.
4.1. Though the petitioner has stated that the petitioner approached the office of the respondent no. 3 claiming ex gratia on the account of the death of her husband, Late Ratan Mandal in terms of the Notification dated 15.11.2014, the respondent no. 3 in the counter affidavit, filed on 10.01.2022, has averred that the claimant has not submitted any representation either at the office of the respondent no. 3 or at the office of the respondent no. 5. It is, however, acknowledged that the respondent no. 5 has, in the meantime, collected the relevant documents like Voter ID Cards of the deceased and the petitioner, the Death Certificate of the deceased, the PME Report, Next of Kin [NoK] Certificate, Police Report, Lat Mandal Report, Gaonburah Report, etc.
5. The contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner that she is one of the Next of Kins [NoKs] of the deceased person who died in a road traffic accident occurred on 16.09.2019 at a public place. It is further contended that as such Next of Kin [NoK] of the deceased person killed in such accident, she is entitled to receive the quantum of relief in terms of the policy formulated by the State Government, which has been notified by the Notification dated 15.11.2014.
Page No. 4/66. On perusal of the said Notification dated 15.11.2014, it is noticed that the same has, inter-alia, made a provision for ex gratia grant to the Next of Kin [NoK] of person killed due to accident in public place or in public carrier [other than killed by extremist/terrorist, miscreants and due to firing of security forces] and such relief has been quantified at Rs. 2,00,000/- for each deceased person in respect of accident which had occurred in the State on or after the date of the notification i.e. 15.11.2014. It has been brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel for the parties that due to certain ambiguity with regard to the term, 'public place', another notification bearing no. R.R.94/2003/288 dated 15.10.2014 came to be issued by the Revenue & Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam for removal of the ambiguity. As per the notification dated 15.10.2014 [supra], the word 'public place' will mean any street, alley, park, public building, any place of business or assembly open to or frequented by the public or any other place, which is open to the public view or to which public has access.
7. Though there might not any representation on behalf of the petitioner in writing claiming ex gratia benefit in terms of the Notification dated 15.11.2014, it is noticed from the averments made on behalf of the respondent no. 5 in the counter affidavit that the relevant documents to consider the claim of the petitioner for ex gratia in terms of the Notification dated 15.11.2014 have already been received by the respondent no. 5.
8. Ms. Mahanta, Mr. Gogoi & Mr. Chetia are not in disagreement to the fact that in this writ petition, the petitioner has claimed that the alleged road traffic accident in question had occurred subsequent to 15.11.2014. It is submitted by Ms. Mahanta, Mr. Gogoi & Mr. Chetia, in unison, that before placing the matter before the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department, the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner shall have to examine the matter in order to verify the veracity of the claim of the petitioner, with regard to, firstly, the alleged road traffic accident which stated to have occurred at a public place resulting in the death of the person, mentioned above; secondly, the claim of the petitioner as one of the Next of Kins [NoKs] of the person who stated to have died as a result of the said alleged road traffic accident, and thirdly, the claim regarding occurrence of the accident at a public place.
Page No. 5/69. This Court has already recognized the rationale behind the policy formulated by the State and notified vide the Notification dated 15.11.2014, in its order dated 04.05.2019 passed in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 2100/2019 [Gunalata Das vs. the State of Assam] and similar other writ petitions, by observing that the dominant purpose of the policy is to provide some succour immediately in the form of financial assistance to the Next of Kin [NoK] of the deceased to tide over the initial shock and hardship before lodging claim for just compensation under the law. Thus, a claim for the relief of ex gratia grant under the policy calls for an expeditious consideration.
10. Taking an overall view of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the rationale behind the policy so formulated, this Court is of the considered view that instead of keeping the writ petition pending for any further period, the same can be disposed of as the claim for relief in the form of ex gratia to the petitioner in this writ petition as one of the Next of Kin [NoK] of the person killed in a road traffic accident, the facts of which are briefly narrated above, is to be verified and considered first at the end of the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner. After such verification and consideration on all relevant aspects including the three aspects, as highlighted by the learned counsel for the State respondents, by calling for reports from the other authorities, the proposal can thereafter, be forwarded by the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner along with his report, to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department for release of ex gratia amount in terms of the Notification dated 15.11.2014, if the petitioner is found entitled to receive the same. The Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department shall thereafter, examined and sanction the quantum of relief for disbursal to the petitioner and/or any other Next of Kins [NoKs] found entitled, in terms of the Notification dated 15.11.2014. It is accordingly ordered. The entire exercise in respect of the case involved in this writ petition should be completed by the above respondent authorities within a period of 3 [three] months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the office of Deputy Commissioner, Jorhat along with a copy of the writ petition with the annexures, from the petitioner. The petitioner and/or the other Next of Kins [NoKs] of the deceased person is/are directed to Page No. 6/6 extend his/her/their assistance and cooperation during the process of such verification and shall furnish the relevant information/documents, available at his/her/their disposal, to facilitate the process of verification, as and when asked for.
11. With the observations made and directions given above, the writ petition stands disposed of. No cost.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant