5 lakhs as companypensation to the appellants.
1 lakh with companyts of Rs.
2 for sending the last photograph of the deceased, which, however, were number received by them despite such representations.
The High Court was of the view that the appellant, his wife and other family members had been denied proper information companysequent to which they have suffered mental agony and financial difficulties for a long period.
However, at the relevant point of time he was working in the CRPF at Mizoram.
It was also stated that a departmental inquiry was companyducted against Constable Desh Raj who was responsibe for the death of the deceased, and LNK Ranjit Singh Yadav, who was the Guard Commander.
It was also mentioned that pursuant to the aforesaid departmental inquiry, Constable Desh Raj was dismissed from service and Guard Commander LNK Ranjit Singh Yadav was punished with reversion to the post of Constable for 16 months.
No submission was made against the order denying liberalised pension.
The present Special Leave Petition was filed by the appellants, who are the parents of the deceased, Sunil Kumar Tiwari, a Constable with the Central Reserve Police Force for short CRPF who died while in service at Mizoram.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.
1 lakh to the appellants but in respect of their prayer for payment of liberalised pension, the Writ Petition was dismissed.
The deceased was a victim of an unfortunate incident and this has caused a heavy loss and mental agony to the family members of the deceased.
The respondents be directed to pay Rs.
Constable Desh Raj who was in the sentry duty at the residence of Development Commissioner, Aizwal mistook the deceased as an intruder to the house and as a measure of safety he fired upon the deceased.
Counsel appearing for the appellants restricted his argument only to the issue of enhancement of quantum of companypensation awarded.
However, while disposing of the Writ Petition the High Court observed that the appellant had suffered mental agony for more than 20 years, particularly, when the fact of the cause of death was number informed to the appellant, his wife and relatives and further by sending a photograph of a person number being the deceased.
The deceased was employed as a Constable in 66 Battalion of CRPF at Bhubaneshwar.
5,000/ to the appellant and his wife for the mental agony and loss suffered by them.
In the Writ Petition, the appellant stated that they made several representations to the Respondent No.
Being aggrieved, the appellant filed a Writ Petition in the High Court praying for the following reliefs 1 to direct the respondents to inquire into the matter and report to the Court and the appellant, 2 to direct the respondents to take action to book the culprit, 3 that an independent inquiry be ordered by the CBI or some other responsible authority to look into the case of the death of the appellants son and 4 if the Honble High Court companyes to the companyclusion that the death of the appellants son was number by an accident, then, the appellant be suitably companypensated by the respondents.
On 01.02.1982, the appellant received information from the office of Respondent No.
As such, the order passed by the High Court denying liberalised pension is number companysidered and interfered with.
The High Court after hearing both the parties issued an order directing for payment of companypensation of Rs.
Ravindra Kumar Sharma, wherein it was stated that the death of the deceased was number an accident but it was a brutal murder by his fellow companystables.
In the said Writ Petition, the respondents replied stating inter alia that the death of the deceased was an accident on the intervening night of 30th November/1st December, 1982.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the High Court, the present Special Leave Petition was filed on which we have heard the learned companynsel appearing for the parties.
5 lakhs on account of mental agony and loss suffered by the appellants due to death of their son while in service.
It was, however, stated that the appellant received a letter dated, 18.12.1982 from a friend of the deceased, viz.,
The Costable Desh Raj, who had fired on the deceased was arrested by the Civil Police, Aizwal and a criminal case was registered against him.
The son of the appellant was working in a sensitive area.
The respondents intimated the appellants that a fellow Constable Desh Raj while being on sentry duty in the residence of the Development Commissioner at Aizwal saw a man climbing a guava tree in the moonlight and companysequently shot four rounds of bullets within a distance of 15 yards as a result of which the deceased died on the spot.
The aforesaid findings recorded by the High Court have number been challenged by the respondents before us by filing any independent appeal.
However, the death of son of the appellant, is definitely number only a personal loss to the family but also financial.
2 that his son died on 01.02.1982 at Mizoram and that his last rites were performed at the place where the deceased was working at the relevant point of time, but numbersuch intimation or information was given to the parents.
Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J. Leave granted.
In this appeal the scope for companysideration is restricted only to actual quantum of companypensation payable to the appellants.
The appellants herein filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay to them companypensation of Rs.
