9. In all the cases before us, we do not have data of the number of dependents for the deceased persons. In respect of injuries, a few have been treated as outpatients and immediately discharged while some persons are still undergoing treatment. The percentage of burns have varied from 5% to 75%. Unfortunately, among the injured victims, there have been casualties during the treatment, for on as late as 05.04.2021, the tally of dead was 27. In this accident, there is no report of any child as having been injured or dead. We confronted only a few persons who are injured and who are less than 18 years of age. We do not think it would be proper for us to assess compensation for everyone by eliciting the age, income, etc. It will be appropriate to take the examples of lumpsum amounts awarded through public law remedies and allow for independent rights to be pursued by any victim through statutory forums prescribed under the Workmen Compensation Act, if so advised. The Workmen Compensation Act itself does not recognise any payment other than through the Commissioner and any compensation that we will recommend could be directed to be paid to the party under notice to the Workmen Compensation Commissioner so that they are not treated as amounts awarded by ‘contracting out’. In the decisions which we have referred, the ex-gratia payment made by the government will not be required to be deducted. On the other hand, we believe that the State Government shall take responsibility for 10% of liability for lack of effective supervision through Inspector of Factories and 10% on the Central Government for their failure to implement the safety laws. Rest of the 80% shall be levied on the licensee and his lessees jointly and severally and the 10% each as we have fixed on the Central and State Governments shall be several. One of us, (Kulkarni) is of the view that on account of the quoted provision of immunity, the payment by the State and the Centre shall be by way of contribution in gratis rather than responsibility by default. Further, as per rule 2(37) of the aforesaid rules, the occupier who has the control and who is responsible for managing the affairs of premises is solely responsible for the accident for the violations of rules and conditions of the licence.
