IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13915 of 2008(F)
1. ANIL KUMAR K., AGED 39 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. SELVARAJAN, AGED 39 YEARS,
3. MAHIN MADHU, AGED 6 YEARS, (MINOR),
4. SURAJ S.DEV, AGED 6 YEARS, (MINOR),
5. PRAVIN PRASAD, AGED 6 YEARS, (MINOR),
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
... Respondent
2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
3. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
5. THE HEAD MISTRESS,
6. THE MANAGER, KUTTAMBERUR VIDYA PRADAYINI
7. R.VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :22/05/2008
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.13915 OF 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioners 1 and 2 are the parents of persons, who died in
an accident on account of collapse of a wall of the school
belonging to the 6th respondent. Petitioners 3 to 5 are persons,
who were injured in the same accident. They are seeking the
following reliefs:
“The Honourable High Court may be pleased to issue
writ of Mandamus or such other or further appropriate
Writ, Order directing
(1) the Respondents jointly and severally to pay
compensation to the petitioners for the loss and injury
suffered by their families by death and injury as the case is
resultant of the Kuttamberur school wall collapse occurred
on 27/03/2008 and
(2) to direct the respondents 2 & 3 to take all
necessary steps to assure safety and security of buildings
and structures in all schools in Kerala State to prevent
repetition of similar mishaps in future.”
Although the petitioners deserve sympathy, I am afraid that the
question of liability for payment of damages cannot be decided in
proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The
W.P.(c)No.13915/08 2
liability for payment of damages depends on negligence of the
person concerned. For proving negligence, evidence has to be
taken. All these cannot be decided in proceedings under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The remedy of the
petitioners lies in filing a civil suit for damages. Without
prejudice to the right of the petitioners to file a suit for the
same cause of action, this writ petition is dismissed.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
Acd
W.P.(c)No.13915/08 3