WP(C) 1866/2010. Gauhati High Court
| Case Number | WP(C) 1866/2010 |
| Judgement Date | August 14, 2018 |
| Court | Gauhati High Court |
I N THE GAUHATI HI GH COURT
(High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
WP( C) No.1866 of 2010
Miss Anindita Das
............ Petitioner
- Versus –
The Union of I ndia and others
........ Respondents
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE ACHI NTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
For the petitioner: Mr. D.M. Thakuria, Adv
For the respondents: Dr. B.N. Gogoi,
Standing Counsel, Railways
Date of Hearing : 14.08.2017.
Date of Judgment: 14.08.2017.
JUDGMENT & ORDER ( ORAL)
Heard Mr. D.M. Thakuria, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Dr. B.N. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel for the railway authorities.
-
A two years old girl had preferred this writ petition in the year 2010 requesting for some compensation to be paid for the death caused to both her parents on 06.06.2009. On 06.06.2009, there was a blockage of the National Highway at the place near Nona Railway Bridge in Nalbari district by the local people of Bilpar by keeping a deadbody in the Bridge, who had died due to some accident therein. As the highway was blocked, both the parents of the petitioner took the risk of crossing the Nona Railway Bridge by walking across the railway track, which was located over the railway bridge of the Nona River. I t is stated that the parents were compelled to do so as they were urgently required to go home as the petitioner was all alone. But unfortunately, at that very moment, a train passed by and hit both the
parents of the petitioner and thereby caused death to them. I n this writ petition, the said two years old girl, who is perhaps about 09(nine) years old as on today has made a prayer that she be compensated for the death caused to her parents.
-
The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Section 124 of the Railways Act, 1989, which provides for some kind of compensation to the passengers who may be injured or died in collusion between trains. The particular provisions of law provide that such compensation be paid whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration.
-
I t is noticed that in the instant case, the parents of the petitioner were not passengers of any train and in fact they were crossing the railway bridge on foot as the adjacent highway was blocked. I n such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that a compensation u/ s 124 of the Railways Act would not be applicable in this case.
-
Reference is also made to Section 124 (A) of the Railways Act, 1989, which...
To continue reading
Request your trial