How Justice Was Done:-
1) December 19, 2003:- Raju Singh Pawar dies after falling from a packed local at Sion railway station. His widow, Kusum, seeks compensation from railways.
2) March 16, 2006:- Railways rejects Kusum's claim saying Pawar was a ticket less traveller who died while crossing the tracks. She moves to the Bombay High Court.
3) November 10, 2008:- HC goes through all the evidence and says Pawar was a bonafide traveller, orders Rs 4 lakh as compensation.
Mumbai:- The Bombay High Court hs ordered the railways to pay a migrant labourer's family Rs 4 lakh as compensation because he fell off a crowded local train and died while he was in Mumbai looking for work. The Railway Claims Tribunal had refused to provide any monetary help, saying Raju Singh Pawar was a ticket less traveller who died while crossing the tracks at Sion.
The high court on Monday reversed the decision and also ordered the maximum compensation amount the railways was liable to pay in cases of "death due to an untoward incident" under provisions of the Railways Act. The clinching testimony came from Pawar's friend and a fellow migrant Yavatmal, Amrut pandagale, who maintained that he had seen Pawar buy a ticket at Kurla station. "The evidence of Amrut has not at all been shaken in the cross-examination," observed Justice A B Chaudhari.
Pawar boarded a local at Kurla on December 19, 2003, to go to Byculla to look for a job. Pandagale, who came to the station to see him off, said Pawar bought a ticket for Rs 10 and boarded the train. Evidence showed that "there was heavy rush on the local and Pawar stood near the door of a compartment. Near Sion station, due to a jerk, he fell from the running train, came under its wheels and died on the spot". Pawar's wife, Kusum Pawar, came to know of his death only 15 days later from the Dadar Government Railway Police.
She first asked the railways for compensation but, in March 2006, the latter refused to pay anything as Pawar was "not a bonafied passenger and his death did not fit the description of an untoward incident"; he was run over by a local while trying to cross the tracks, he said.
Pawar's wife then moved a writ in the high court along with her three minor children as appellants and demanded that justice be done.
The court wondered why the station master of Sion station was not produced before the tribunal to support the railway theory. "It appears that, after the deceased was seen off by Pandagale, he fell off the train somewhere near Sion station and he died," observed the judge, ordering a compensation of Rs 4 lakh for Pawar's family.
A senior railway official said the amount was "usually" paid to the family within a stipulated period in such cases unless the railway authorities decided to appeal against the order in the Supreme Court.
1) December 19, 2003:- Raju Singh Pawar dies after falling from a packed local at Sion railway station. His widow, Kusum, seeks compensation from railways.
2) March 16, 2006:- Railways rejects Kusum's claim saying Pawar was a ticket less traveller who died while crossing the tracks. She moves to the Bombay High Court.
3) November 10, 2008:- HC goes through all the evidence and says Pawar was a bonafide traveller, orders Rs 4 lakh as compensation.
Mumbai:- The Bombay High Court hs ordered the railways to pay a migrant labourer's family Rs 4 lakh as compensation because he fell off a crowded local train and died while he was in Mumbai looking for work. The Railway Claims Tribunal had refused to provide any monetary help, saying Raju Singh Pawar was a ticket less traveller who died while crossing the tracks at Sion.
The high court on Monday reversed the decision and also ordered the maximum compensation amount the railways was liable to pay in cases of "death due to an untoward incident" under provisions of the Railways Act. The clinching testimony came from Pawar's friend and a fellow migrant Yavatmal, Amrut pandagale, who maintained that he had seen Pawar buy a ticket at Kurla station. "The evidence of Amrut has not at all been shaken in the cross-examination," observed Justice A B Chaudhari.
Pawar boarded a local at Kurla on December 19, 2003, to go to Byculla to look for a job. Pandagale, who came to the station to see him off, said Pawar bought a ticket for Rs 10 and boarded the train. Evidence showed that "there was heavy rush on the local and Pawar stood near the door of a compartment. Near Sion station, due to a jerk, he fell from the running train, came under its wheels and died on the spot". Pawar's wife, Kusum Pawar, came to know of his death only 15 days later from the Dadar Government Railway Police.
She first asked the railways for compensation but, in March 2006, the latter refused to pay anything as Pawar was "not a bonafied passenger and his death did not fit the description of an untoward incident"; he was run over by a local while trying to cross the tracks, he said.
Pawar's wife then moved a writ in the high court along with her three minor children as appellants and demanded that justice be done.
The court wondered why the station master of Sion station was not produced before the tribunal to support the railway theory. "It appears that, after the deceased was seen off by Pandagale, he fell off the train somewhere near Sion station and he died," observed the judge, ordering a compensation of Rs 4 lakh for Pawar's family.
A senior railway official said the amount was "usually" paid to the family within a stipulated period in such cases unless the railway authorities decided to appeal against the order in the Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment