Disposed

Jiren Munda v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Dec 2022WP(C)/30683/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged non-payment of compensation for their father's electrocution death. The Court observed that proceedings had not been initiated with the Licensee in Form-II as mandated by the OERC Regulations, 2020, and allowed no substantive relief, directing them to approach the Licensee instead.

What did the court decide?

None. Court directed petitioners to approach the Licensee in Form-II of the Regulation for redressal of their grievance.

Jiren Munda Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 30683 OF 2022

¶2

Jiren Munda and others

¶3

…. Petitioners

¶4

Mr. Mukunda Chandra Mishra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties

¶8

Mr. Baibaswata Panigrahi, Additional Standing Counsel

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

14.12.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶16

The Petitioners in this writ petition pray for a direction

¶17

for releasing of compensation for death of their father, namely, Suleman Munda due to electrocution.

¶18

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel submits that father of the Petitioners had died on 4^th September, 2013 due to electrocution and a report was lodged before the Barbil Police Station, Keonjhar vide U.D F.I.R. No.18 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. U.D. No.105 of 2013 on 4^th September, 2013. Subsequently, the Petitioners made an application before the Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission on 6^th September, 2022, which was forwarded to the Tata Power North Orissa Distribution, Januganj, Balasore on 1^st November, 2022 for taking proper action as per the rule. It is contended that in spite of the same, no step has been taken by the TPNODL for payment of compensation. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

The Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission (Compensation to Victims of Electrical Accidents) Regulations, 2020 (for short ‘the Regulation’) clearly stipulates that the Petitioners have to make an application in Form-II of the said Regulation to the Licensee/Generating company for compensation. However, Clause (11) of the said regulation clearly provides that if the claimant is aggrieved with regard to the entitlement of compensation or quantum of compensation in accordance with rules or non-redressal of his grievance, he may file an appeal before the Secretary, Energy Department, Government of Odisha.

¶22

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel, however, submits that the Petitioners made an application to the Secretary, OERC, which is neither the Licensee nor the Generating company. Thus, the Petitioners are required to make an application in proper format to the Licensee for compensation. That having not been done, the prayer made in this writ petition cannot be entertained.

¶23

In view of the above, this Court disposes of this writ petition with an observation that the Petitioners, if so advised, may approach the Licensee in Form-II of the Regulation for redressal of their grievance.

¶24

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶25

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Jiren Munda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiren Munda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Sakur Vs Sk.Aptauddin

Baraju @ Brajabandhu Das Vs Ghana Biswal

Hemanta Kumar Bisoi Vs the Regional Transport Officer, Angul

Sameer Chandra Dash Vs Pitambar Behera

Bibhudatta Patra Vs Khulana Patra

Ishan Das Vs State of Odisha