Remanded

Syamini v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Dec 2022WP(C)/22414/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the court set aside the rejection of compensation for a husband's death, directing the Divisional Forest Officer to re-examine the claim based on a Range Officer's report stating a wild boar caused the accident, despite another report citing driver negligence.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P4 application afresh and pass a reasoned order within two months.

Syamini Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

W.P.(C) NO.22414 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SYAMINI, AGED 24 YEARS, W/O. LATE ANIL, THAZHATHE HOUSE, PADINJARETHARA, KUDALLUR P.O., PALLASANA, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD-678 688.

¶8

BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FOREST AND WILD LIFE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶11

2 CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶12

3 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, KALLEKULANGARA P.O., PALAKKAD-678 009.

¶13

4 THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, OTTAPALAM FOREST RANGE, GOVT. PRESS P.O., KULAPPULLY, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD.

¶14

SRI. T.P. SAJAN, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR FORESTS

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

-2-

¶17

W.P.(C) NO.22414 OF 2022

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 20^th day of December, 2022

¶20

The petitioner is seeking compensation under Rule 4 of the Kerala Rules for Payment of Compensation to Victims of Attack by Wild Animals, for the death of her husband. The incident resulting in the death occurred when an autorickshaw driven by petitioner's husband against a wild boar that had crossed the road all of a sudden. The request for compensation is rejected relying on Ext.R3(a) final report wherein it is stated that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the petitioner's husband.

¶21

Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the final report cannot be the basis for denying compensation, as the report is based entirely on the statement of the passenger in the autorickshaw. The passenger had blamed the driver so as to claim compensation for the injuries sustained by him. It is

¶22

-3-

¶23

W.P.(C) NO.22414 OF 2022

¶24

submitted that Ext.P5 report of the Range Officer clearly shows that the accident had occurred due to the wild boar crossing the road suddenly.

¶25

Learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the Scheme provides for Payment of Compensation to Victims of Wild Boar attack and it is doubtful whether, compensation is payable for death due to an accident that had occurred by reason of wild boar crossing the road.

¶26

Having heard the learned Counsel on both sides and having carefully gone through the documents and particularly Ext.P5 report of the Range Officer, I find that the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the competent authority. The petitioner's claim should not have been rejected based on the final report when the Range Officer had reported that the accident occurred due to the wild boar running across the road. No doubt, while considering the claim, the authority can decide as to whether an accident of this nature falls within the ambit of the Scheme.

¶27

-4-

¶28

W.P.(C) NO.22414 OF 2022

¶29

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P4 application afresh

¶30

and pass a reasoned order within two months of receipt of

¶31

a copy of this judgment.

¶32

Sd/- V.G. ARUN JUDGE

¶33

bpr

¶34

-5-

¶35

W.P.(C) NO.22414 OF 2022

¶36

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22414/2022

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶38

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R NO. 1153/2020 OF OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION IN PALAKKAD DISTRICT ALONG WITH FIS STATEMENT DATED 24/11/20.

¶39

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POST-MORTEM CERTIFICATE P.M. NO. 1158/2020 DATED 25/11/20 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT SURGEON, DISTRICT HOSPITAL PALAKKAD.

¶40

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5/4/18 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶41

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION NO.44202 DATED 11/1/21 ALONG WITH DEATH CERTIFICATE OF LATE ANIL.

¶42

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 27.02.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

¶43

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED FROM EDISTRICT KERALA.

¶44

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E2-4381/2022 DATED 15/6/22 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶45

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 16/09/2021 ISSUED BY TAHSILDAR CHITTUR.

¶46

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶47

EXHIBIT R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JFCM COURT DATED 24.1.2021.

¶48

EXHIBIT R3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE NOTE AND SCREENSHOT OF CLAIM PROCESSING.

Syamini v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syamini v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jomon C.V. Vs the Union of India

Ramina C., Vs State of Kerala

K. Snehalatha Vs Union of India

K.R.Suresh Kumar, Vs the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General)

Self Financing Para Medical College Managers Association (Dhi) Reg. No. 554/04 Vs State of Kerala

Madhusoodhanan Pillai Vs the Under Secretary