Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(b) Issuance of a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to disburse compensation to eligible and affected farmers strictly in accordance with applicable law, as per the comprehensive and detailed assessment and analysis carried out by the petitioner based on the available NDRF data and communicated to the District Collector via letter of 28/10/2022.
(c) Issuance of a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, to the respondents declaring that assessment of compensation to be paid to eligible farmers must be only on the basis of the total affected area and not the total insured area as erroneously directed by the District Collector.

under the Insurance Contract stood concluded in view of the decision of this Court, dated 6/5/2022 in those three Petitions and the orders passed by the Apex Court in contempt proceedings.
SUBMISSIONS :
7. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Company made oral submissions and has placed on record written notes of arguments. He has also relied on the notes of submissions dated 14/7/2023 filed pursuant to the leave granted by this Court on the said date. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the directions issued by the State official respondents were without jurisdiction, illegal and invalid as well. The directions and the demands issued by the State Government and its officials to pay the amount of compensation on the basis of entire insured area were erroneous and inconsistent with their stand in the earlier round of litigation (PILs. and W.P.). Their stand was that the petitioner Company was refusing to pay the compensation on the basis of entire insured area but only making payment on the basis of total affected area determined by the NDRF :: 10 ::

the due date. Communications made by the petitioner Company, asking for payment of the outstanding insurance premium were also adverted to.
With all the aforesaid submissions, the learned Senior Counsel urged for allowing the Writ Petition in toto.

13. Learned Senior Counsel representing the respondent State too made oral submissions and placed on record a summary thereof. According to him, the issue involved in this Writ Petition regarding quantum of amount of compensation stood concluded vide judgment and order dated 6/5/2022 passed by this Court. The observations in paras No.55, 59, 64, 69, 75, 79 and the operative order have all been reproduced in his written submissions. According to him, reference to NDRF norms in the earlier round of litigation was in the nature of considering the percentage of loss to the crops during Kharif Season 2020. The NDRF data was the basis for concluding that, there was loss of more than 33% and therefore, considering the crop insurance scheme, the requirement was of loss more than 25%. Therefore, it is only in these circumstances, the said NDRF data was referred to :: 19 ::

before this Court and it has nothing to do with the area. The petitioner Insurance Company itself has considered and granted full claims/ compensation to the agriculturists who had given intimations within 72 hours. The Insurance Company paid the claim amount for total insured area of each agriculturist as per the data provided by them. Therefore, the Insurance Company is now estopped from contending that, it will consider the claims of the insured agriculturists only to the extent of 2 Hector as per the NDRF Norms. The petitioner Insurance Company is subsequently in order to disobey the directions issued by this Court in PIL No.91/2021 is trying to misread and misinterpret the reference of NDRF Norms in the judgment after dismissal of their SLPs.