AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The grievance of the writ petitioner in this Article 226 petition is that a certain amount is payable in view of a welfare scheme by the Government of
West Bengal, since his wife died due to natural disasters. He alleges that there is a scheme by which families of agricultural labourers who die due to
being struck by lightning while working in the fields are entitled to compensation by the State.
No such scheme in this regard has been annexed with the petition. All that has been annexed to the writ petition is a death certificate of the wife of
the petitioner showing that the name of the petitioner is Ram Bharat Chowdhury as appears from p.17 (Annexure P1).
The writ petitioner’s further case is that the State of West Bengal issued a cheque in his name under the said scheme, but that payment was not
made thereunder when he sought to encash it on the grounds that the bank insisted that a separate discharge by the payee was required. The writ
petition is moved on service; affidavit of service be taken on record.
Mr Government Pleader ably assisted by Mr Sadhu appearing for the State submits that the reasons why such a discharge was sought was because
the cheque was issued as applied for by the petitioner in the name Ram Bharat Chowdhury as appears from the death certificate of his wife, while the
petitioner maintains his bank accounts in the name of “Ram Bhart Chowdhuryâ€. He denies any fault committed on behalf of the State, and
submits that only the bank can disclose why it sought a separate discharge, if at all, and the bank ought to have been made a party.
He also submits if the petitioner has used two different names â€" one for applying for compensation and another for his bank account â€" the State
cannot be blamed for this. That apart, he points out that there is nothing in the writ petition to show that the petitioner’s wife died due to being
struck by lightning except the bald allegations made in para.3 of the writ petition on oath in support of which no record of post-mortem report has been
annexed to the petition.
To this, Mr Ghosh appearing for the petitioner contends that the Aadhar card and PAN card filed show that the name of the petitioner is as given in
the cheque issued; and that he has since corrected the discrepancy in the bank records. Mr Ghosh submits if a fresh cheque is issued by the
Government in the name of Ram Bharat Chowdhury, then there will be no difficulty to encash it.
However, for the reasons aforesaid, I am not satisfied that the petitioner has made out a strong case for the ex gratia payment. Therefore, while I
dismiss the present writ petition to be defective which is technically bound to fail, I grant liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh one disclosing all the
documents that would show the death occurred due to being struck by lightning and the scheme under which he is claiming. If such a fresh writ
petition is filed, it shall be considered afresh. However, this order shall not prevent the petitioner from agitating the grievance on merits, since I have
decided nothing on merits. No costs. Certified website copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the parties.