Disposed

Rabiya v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC8 May 2024W.P.(C)/10968/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a 65% disabled widow whose husband died in a hospital, filed a writ petition seeking quashing of the Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme (2018) cap and enhanced interim compensation. The Court disposed of the petition directing the Delhi Legal Services Authority to consider the petitioner's representation on further compensation within prescribed timelines.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent DLSA to file a reasoned decision on further interim compensation within 04 weeks after considering the petitioner's representation.

Rabiya Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 10968/2020 & CM APPL. 34324/2020

¶4

RABIYA ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms. Hetvi Patel and Mr. Paul Kumar Kalai, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents

¶8

Through: Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, ASC with Ms. Kavita Nailwal, Advocate for GNCTD Mr. Sarfaraz Khan, Mr. Mirza Amir Baig, Mr. Abdul Wahid and Advocates for R-2/DLSA. Mr. Abhinav Pandey, Member Secretary (Litigation), DLSA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN O R D E R % 08.05.2024

¶11

The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution on the facts that the petitioner suffers from 65% disability and her husband has died in Rao Tularam Memorial Hospital when the petitioner was admitted there for the treatment of fever. The petitioner has made the following prayer:-

¶12

a. Quash and set aside serial no.1, Schedule of Delhi Victim Compensation Scheme, 2018 to the extent it limits the maximum compensation for loss of life to Rs.10 Lakhs.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/05/2024 at 12:01:54

¶14

b. Direct respondents to pay an amount of Rs.90 Lakhs as enhanced compensation under the impugned scheme;

¶15

c. Direct the Respondents to pay an amount of Rs.10 Lakhs as interim compensation under the impugned scheme;

¶16

d. Direct the respondents to provide employment to the petitioner;

¶17

e. Any other order deem fit and proper;

¶18

During the course of arguments, the counsel for the petitioner stated that in the present petition, she is not pressing the prayer ‘a’ keeping in view the prevailing circumstances pertaining to the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner further stated that the petitioner is 65% disabled and has to maintain two children and the petitioner was given only 04 lakhs as interim compensation but after considering the peculiar facts and her socio economic conditions, the respondent no. 2/Delhi Legal Services Authority be directed to pay further interim compensation to the petitioner.

¶19

Mr. Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate for the respondent no. 2/DLSA assisted by Mr. Abhinav Pandey, Secretary, (Litigation), DLSA stated that as per the proviso attached to the Clause 13 of the Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme, 2018, the maximum interim compensation of Rs. 50,000/- can be given to the affected persons. It is further stated that after considering the peculiar circumstances, the petitioner has already been given 04 lakhs as interim compensation which is much beyond the interim compensation which is allowed as per proviso to Clause 13 of the Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme, 2018. It is further stated that after conclusion of the trial, if the accused is convicted, the prime responsibility to pay the

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/05/2024 at 12:01:54

¶22

compensation is of the accused and on his failure, the liability/responsibility rests on the respondent no. 2/DLSA.

¶23

The counsel for the petitioner stated that she shall be filing a representation with the respondent no. 2/DLSA for release of further interim compensation in view the peculiar circumstances of the petitioner as mentioned hereinabove.

¶24

Let the representation, on behalf of the petitioner, if any, be filed within 15 days and thereafter, the respondent no. 2 is directed to take appropriate reasoned decision after considering guidelines and the judgments passed by the superior courts in respect of the compensation within 04 weeks with intimation to the petitioner.

¶25

The present petition, along with pending application, stands disposed of. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate legal proceedings in case of altered circumstances or on being aggrieved by any decision taken on the representation for further compensation in accordance with law.

¶26

A copy of this order be given dasti to the counsel for the petitioner as well as to Mr. Abhinav Pandey, Secretary, (Litigation), DLSA.

¶27

DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J

¶28

MAY 8, 2024 Sk/am

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/05/2024 at 12:01:54

Rabiya v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabiya v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarpal Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sarpal Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Raj Babu Dvivedy and Others Vs Govt. of NCT Delhi & Ors.

Arun Srivastav Vs Jawaharlal Nehru University and Ors.

Sanjiv Kumar Vashist Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

Trio Security and Intelligence Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sh. Sunil Kumar & Anr.

National Federaion of Farmers Procurement Processing & Retailing Cooperativs of India Ltd. Nacop Vs Union of India & Ors. & Anr.

Lord Krishna Tradexim LLP (Pan AABCL4428K) (as Successor in Interest of Lord Krishna Tradexim (P) L Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(1) Delhi & Ors.

Union of India Vs Devi Singh Mann & Anr.

M/S Bioshield Lifesciences Private Limited & Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Hospimax Healthcare Private Limited Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sourabh Chandrakar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ravi Uppal Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Shivani Industries Vs Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) & Anr.