Orissa High Court
Ganda Digal vs State Of Odisha And Others on 5 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.3319 of 2020
(Through hybrid mode)
Ganda Digal .... Petitioner
Mr. P.C. Chhinchani, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. T. Pattanayak, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
ORDER
05.09.2022
Order I.A. No.10134 of 2022
No.
4. 1. Mr. Chhinchani, learned advocate appears on behalf of
applicants, who are seeking substitution as legal representatives of
deceased petitioner. Applicants are the widow and three sons.
2. I.A. no.10134 of 2022 is allowed and disposed of. Consolidated
cause title has already been filed.
3. Mr. Chhinchani submits, impugned order dated 31st August,
2019 is to be set aside and quashed and there be direction for
payment of compensation as per entry-B in table at paragraph-10 in
judgment of the Supreme Court in Archbishop Raphael Cheenath
S.V.D. v. State of Orissa reported in AIR 2016 SC 3639.
// 2 //
4. He demonstrates from paragraphs 5, 7 and 27 of judgment
dated 30th September, 2011 passed by Assistant Sessions Judge,
Balliguda in, inter alia, S.T. 26 of 2010 (State of Orissa v. Tika
Mallick) that deceased petitioner was grievously injured in the
communal violence. As such there was direction by the Supreme
Court for payment of Rs.30,000/- in cases of serious injury.
5. Mr. Pattanayak, learned advocate, Additional Standing Counsel
appears on behalf of State. He submits, in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the
counter it has been stated that on authorization for payment from the
Chief Minister's Relief Fund, the additional compensation will be
paid. On query from Court he submits, the deceased was described
as informant in the judgment of the Assistant Sessions Judge.
6. There appears to be implied admission by State, in the counter.
Nevertheless, following from impugned order is extracted and
reproduced below:
"Whereas, it is seen from the contents of the
representation that the applicant was injured in the
violence but he has not reported the fact. Now he is found
well and getting old age pension and ration also. No
compensation has been given during the violence 2008.
As such, as per WP(C) No.404/2008, addl. Compensation
will be given only to the affected persons/NoKs observing
the condition that they have been paid the original
compensation.
// 3 //
Taking into the above fact, it is ascertained that the
representation of the applicant Sri Ganda Digal has got
no merit for consideration as per WP(C) No.404/2008
communicated by the Home Department (Spl. Section)
vide Letter No.1050/C Dated 6.5.2017 and is hereby
rejected."
There is no doubt that the deceased was grievously injured as
appearing from the judgment of the Assistant Sessions Judge. The
Collector, in giving one of the reasons to reject being that deceased
petitioner had not reported he was injured in the violence, appears to
have not seen the wood for the trees. Furthermore, the Supreme
Court directed payment of additional compensation of Rs.30,000/- in
cases of serious injury. This additional compensation was directed,
when no compensation had been granted.
7. State is directed to pay Rs.30,000/- along with interest thereon
at 6% per annum simple commencing from 1st September, 2019 till
date of payment to petitioner. The commencement date for
calculation of interest is taken from date of impugned order.
Payment must be made within three weeks of communication.
8. The writ petition is disposed of.
(Arindam Sinha)
Judge
Sks
