Child Rights Commission can only recommend compensation not order it: HC

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: The High Court of Kar nataka has held that the Kar nataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (KSCPCR) can only make recommendations for compensation to victims and cannot order for payment of compensation itself. The recommendation by the Commission can be considered by the State Government which has the powers to order the compensation, the Court said.

The judgement by Justice Ravi V Hosmani was passed in a petition filed by the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd (BESCOM) against the order of the Chairman, KSCPCR. The petition was filed in 2018 challenging the KSCPCR’s May 17, 2018 order.

An overhead feeder electricity line has been in existence since 1991 in Austin Town, Bengaluru. In 2015-16 the Slum Clearance Board built five blocks of Basic Services Urban Poor Quarters below it. One feederline passed in-between two of the residential blocks. One minor, Jennifer, accidentally touched the power line while drying wet clothes. She sustained burn injuries.

Rs 25 lakh compensation

The KSCPCR ordered for compensation to be paid to the parents of the child by BESCOM. BESCOM challenged it in the High Court contending that the accident was not caused by its negligence and there were guidelines for minimum distance between buildings and power lines. It was the Slum Board’s negligence as they had not maintained the minimum distance.

But the KSCPCR had held the BESCOM guilty a n d ordered it to pay the entire medical bills and also pay a compensation of Rs.25,00,000 for causing pain and suffering. The HC in its judgement cited several earlier judgments of the HC in which it was “held that respondent No.3 (KSCPCR) did not have adjudicatory powers and that directions issued, in any case, have to be considered as recommendations made to Government, which was required to consider same and pass appropriate orders after hearing both victims as well as Supply Company.”

The parents of the victim child and the KSCPCR were made the respondents by BESCOM in the HC. But they were unrepresented. The HC said that since the petition was from 2018, it is being taken up for disposal. In its recent judgement, it said, “In view of the consistent view taken by this Court in decisions relied upon by learned counsel for petitioner, directions issued by respondent no.3 exercising powers under Section 14 and 15 of the Act would have to be treated as recommendations to the State Government. As held, the Government is required to pass speaking orders after affording the opportunity of hearing to parties.”