Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 631 (PAT)

Sugriv Mahto v. State Of Bihar

2001-07-25

NAGENDRA RAI, P.N.YADAV

body2001
Judgment 1. Heard learned for the appellant and the Electricity Board. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 11.1.2001 passed by the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C No. 11599 of 1997 dismissing the writ application filed by the appellant for a direction to the Electrical Inspector to hold enquiry with regard to the death of son of the appellant, who is said to have been electrocuted on 27th October, 1997 while working in the field. 3. The facts which are not in dispute are that the son of the appellant was working in a field belonging to him on the said day and electric wire fell as a result of which the son of the appellant died and standing crops damaged. It is stated that an application was filed before the Electricity Board for payment of compensation on the assertion that the due to negligence of the employees of the Board death had occurred but no decision was taken by the Board and thereafter the writ application was filed. 4. During the course of hearing, counsel for the parties drew our attention to the provisions as contained in section 33 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 , which provides, inter alia, that if any accident occurs in connection with the generation, transmission, supply or use of energy in connection with any part of the electric supply-lines or other works of any person and the accident results or is likely to have resulted in loss of human or animal life or in any injury to a human being or any animal, such person shall give notice of the occurrence and of any such loss or injury etc. to the Electrical Inspector or such other authorities as may be prescribed by the Government. The stand of the Board is that as no application has been filed before the Electrical Inspector, enquiry has not been held to fix the reason for the incident so that on that basis appropriate action may be taken. 5. to the Electrical Inspector or such other authorities as may be prescribed by the Government. The stand of the Board is that as no application has been filed before the Electrical Inspector, enquiry has not been held to fix the reason for the incident so that on that basis appropriate action may be taken. 5. After hearing the counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the appellant should file an application before the Electrical Inspector within two weeks from today and the Electrical Inspector is directed to hold enquiry and submit his report to the Board within two months after filing of the petition and thereafter the Board is directed to consider the report and take appropriate decision on the basis of the said report within two months thereafter. If the appellant feels aggrieved with the decision of the Board, he may move this Court again for appropriate orders. 6. With the above observation, this appeal stands disposed of.