Kerala High Court
Prabhakaran vs District Collector on 3 July, 2024
Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
Wednesday, the 3rd day of July 2024 / 12th Ashadha, 1946
WP(C) NO. 17171 OF 2024 (V)
PETITIONERS:
1. PRABHAKARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O ANDI RESIDING AT MOOLADUKKAM,
MULIYAR P.O, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671542
2. SREELATHA, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O PRABHAKARAN RESIDING AT MOOLADUKKAM ,
MULIYAR P.O, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671542
RESPONDENTS:
1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, (ENDOLSUPHAN CELL) VIDYANAGAR P.O,
KASARAGOD, PIN - 671123
2. DISTRICT PROGRAMME MANAGER, AROGYAKERALAM KASARAGOD, DISTRICT
MONITORING AND SUPPORT UNIT, NHM OFFICE, NEAR NURSING SCHOOL, COURT
ROAD, PUTHIYAKOTTA, KANHANGAD, PIN - 671315
3. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, ENDOSULFAN REHABILTATION CELL, NATIONAL
HEALTH MISSION , KANHANGAD, PIN - 671315
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to direct the 1st respondent to restore free medical support to
the 2nd petitioner and her affected two children pending disposal of this
Writ Petition in the interest of justice.
This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and
the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of
SUJINI.S, Advocate for the petitioners and of the GOVERNMENT PLEADER, the
court passed the following:
P.B.SURESH KUMAR & M.B.SNEHALATHA, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.17171 of 2024
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2024
ORDER
P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.
The second petitioner claims to be a victim of the use of the pesticide 'Endosulfan'. The first petitioner is the husband of the second petitioner. The petitioners have four children, of which three children namely, Jishnu Kumar, Jyothika and Adithya Krishnan are also claimed to be victims of Endosulfan. It is stated by the petitioners that although the second petitioner and the children namely Jyothika and Jishnu Kumar were included in the list of beneficiaries drawn for treatment of Endosulfan victims and were extended treatment facilities on that basis, the second petitioner and her daughter Jyothika have been denied treatment facilities since 2019. It is also stated by the petitioners that their third child Adithya Krishnan is also now suffering from ailments relating to the use of Endosulfan, and he is not being extended treatment facilities as extended to other similarly placed victims of Endosulfan. The petitioners, therefore, seek directions to the first respondent to include the second petitioner and two children namely, Jyothika and W.P.(C) No.17171 of 2024 -: 2 :- Adithya Krishnan also in the list of beneficiaries for treatment facilities extended to Endosulfan victims so as to enable them to claim treatment facilities free of cost.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the second petitioner and Jyothika were not included in the list of beneficiaries drawn for extending treatment facilities as it was found in the medical camp held in the year 2017 that their ailments were not related to the use of Endosulfan. They were however, extended treatment facilities later as their ailments were found to be prima facie relating to the use of Endosulfan, as per the directions issued by the State Government in G.O.(Rt) 1192/2013 dated 02.04.2013. It was also submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the said facility was withdrawn based on the decision taken by the District Level Endosulfan Cell in their meeting held on 03.07.2020 to confine free treatment facilities only to the beneficiaries included in the list earlier drawn by the first respondent. As far as the son of the petitioners Jishnu Kumar is concerned, it was submitted by the learned Government Pleader that he was found to be a victim of Endosulfan use and he is extended treatment facilities in terms of Government Order G.O. (M.S) 111/13 dated 26.03.2023.
W.P.(C) No.17171 of 2024-: 3 :-
3. The case set out by the petitioners in the writ petition is that the second petitioner and their three children are similarly placed, and denial of treatment facilities to the second petitioner and two of their children is arbitrary.
4. No doubt, since it is asserted by the respondents that the second petitioner and the children other than Jishnu Kumar are not Endosulfan victims, the correctness of the said stand needs to be examined. At the same time, inasmuch as it was found earlier that the ailments suffered by the second petitioner and Jyothika are prima facie due to the use of Endosulfan and they were extended treatment facilities free of cost on that basis, we are of the view that the case of the petitioners ought to be considered with utmost sympathy. It is all the more so since they hail from a considerably poor economic background. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to pass an interim order directing the first respondent to constitute a special medical team to subject the second petitioner and the children Jyothika and Adithya Krishna to medical examination to ascertain whether the ailments suffered by them are due to the use of Endosulfan. This shall be done within two weeks, and a report as to the compliance of this order shall be filed before this court within three weeks. Needless to say, if it is found that the second petitioner W.P.(C) No.17171 of 2024 -: 4 :- and the children referred to above are the victims of Endosulfan, they should also be extended the benefit of the Government Order GO (M.S) 111/13 dated 26.03.2023.
List after three weeks.
H/O Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
Sd/-
M.B.SNEHALATHA, JUDGE.
Mn
03-07-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar