JUDGMENT 1. . - By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to give financial assistance of Rs. 2.00 lacs to the petitioner and his family on account of death of his son caused due to falling into the bore well. 2. Submission of Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been discriminated in the matter of grant of compensation on account of fatal accidental death of his Sunil, who fell in the bore well situated in his Khatedari land in Village Nimeda whereas parents of Suraj, another victim of death caused by falling into the bore well, have awarded Rs. 2,00,000 situated in the Khatedari land of other persons. 3. Mr. Jinesh Jain could only make out the difference of his own Khatedari and situation of well in the Khatedati of another in the aforesaid two cases. 4. I have gone through record of the writ petition and further considered submissions made by Counsel for the parties. 5. On 19th August, 2009, this Court passed the following detailed order : "The petitioner's case is that his son, Sunil aged about four years, had fallen into a deep bore well behind the petitioner's house. For, the death of his child, the State had offered him Rs. 10,000/- by way of compensation. Meanwhile, other child, namely Suraj who also fell in a bore well in village Nimeda, District Jaipur, the parents of Suraj were paid Rs. 2,00,000/- by the Government, by way of compensation. Hence, the petitioner claims that he has been discriminated in a hostile manner. In its reply, the State has not categorically denied the fact that it has paid Rs. 2,00,000/- to Suraj's family. It has merely stated that 'there is no proof of the fact that Rs. 2,00,000/- were paid to Suraj's family'. Since the fact whether Rs. 2,00,000/- were paid to Suraj's family or not and whether any amount was paid to Suraj's family is within the knowledge of the State, the State is expected to make a positive and a clear statement with regard to the amount given to Suraj's family. Mr. Jinesh Jain, the learned Counsel for the State, is directed to file an affidavit clearly informing this Court about the amount paid by the State to Suraj's family by way of compensation. It should also inform this Court whether Suraj's case is similar to petitioner's case. Mr. Jinesh Jain, the learned Counsel for the State, is directed to file an affidavit clearly informing this Court about the amount paid by the State to Suraj's family by way of compensation. It should also inform this Court whether Suraj's case is similar to petitioner's case. Put up on 2nd of September, 2009." 6. I am of the view that no such vast discrimination can be made solely on the ground that the land where the bore well is situated in the Khatedari land of the petitioner and the other is situate in the Khatedari land of other person. The compensation is mainly for unnatural fatal accidental death of the son of petitioner, therefore, in the matter of grant of compensation in such matters, the petitioner has been discriminated. However, Keeping in view that the bore well in which son of the petitioner fell down and died, was situated in the land of the petitioner, where much care was to be taken by the parents of the child (petitioner's son), I reduce the compensation by Rs. 50,000/- as compared to the compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- granted to Suraj's family. The petitioner has already been paid Rs. 10,000/-, therefore, the respondents are directed to make payment of compensation amounting to Rs. 1,40,000/- more to the petitioner. 7. The writ petition is party allowed, as indicated above.Petition party allowed. *******