M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) THIS appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent at the instance of the State of Jharkhand is directed against the judgment dated 13th February, 2003 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 542 of 1994, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents (appellant herein) for payment of compensation to the respondents (writ petitioners) for the alleged demolition of the structure put by the writ petitioners on the reserve forest and also for carrying away their articles and belongings.
(2.) THE respondents filed the writ petition for the grant of compensation on the ground that the authorities of the respondents (appellants herein), in violation of all the norms and laws, demolished the dwellings of the writ petitioners and taken away with them all the articles with an intention to cause injury/loss to them. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, considered the report of the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum wherein it was reported that the writ petitioners were dwellers in "Jhopris". The Officers of the Forest Department went to the village to stop construction being made on. reserve forest and in the process, partially damaged the dwellings of the petitioners. Considering the constitutional goal and Article 21 of the Constitution, the learned Single Judge held that the Officers of the Forest Department did something which the law did not permit and, therefore, the writ petitioners are entitled to compensation for mental agony and torture. For better appreciation, the findings and observations made by the learned Single Judge are quoted herein below: 12. From what happened on the fateful day, as it is apparent from the report of the Deputy Commissioner, is something which grieves the heart of this Court. What these officers did on that day is something for which we should be ashamed of. The law and the concept of equality of justice is not meant only for the upper strata and the superior strata of our society. It is meant to percolate and trickle down even into the distant nucleus of our social structure and contain within it sweep even those, who reside in remote Jungle area and villages, much below the line of poverty but who, nevertheless, are very much citizens of our own country. This Court as a Court of equity cannot shut its eyes to such gross injustice that may have been committed upon such hapless individuals. Article 21 of the Constitution of India ensures that no person of our country shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty, except in accordance with the procedure established bylaw. Today, looking back and gazing on various constitutional pronouncements, one has to accept that now it is a well known and well recognized canon of law that the right to live enshrined under Article 21 also includes the right to live decently and this right, in turn, includes the right to live with dignity and honour. When the State or its Officers go on a rampage and even partially damage or destroy a person's habitat, the elementary concept of the right to life lies strewn on the ground in millions of broken fragments crying out loud to world that "here lies the Constitution and its ideals which we refuse to honour" a moment of shame and agony for the guardians and protectors of law. 13. The other aspect which also touches the heart of this Court is the fact that on the one hand the petitioners have stated that these officers carried away all articles while, on the other hand, the Deputy Commissioner refutes such allegations and says that this is not true. This Court wonders and poses a question to itself and asks us to what possible articles of these poor villagers could have been taken away....? These people living below the poverty line and residing in deep and interior villages surrounded by forests can hardly be said to be in possession of worldly articles of luxury which, for want of a better name we term as "house -hold goods". Perhaps the household articles that they possess could be in the shape of a cot woven by ordinary cotton threads or utensils made of leaves. If steel utensils, electronic gadgets, motor cars and expensive furniture are regarded by the upper strata of the society as indispensable but valuable house -hold items, then why cannot these children of lesser gods also regard simple costs, leaf utensils,, firewood etc. as indispensable house -hold articles so very integral to their kind of living? When such a simple and poor villager complains that his household articles have been taken away, a person listening to him and who belongs to the upper strata would hardly notice them to be missing and would come to a conclusion that the grievances are not correct. This Court, therefore, refrains from making any comments on the report of the Deputy Commissioner in this respect and merely hastens to add that the Deputy Commissioner could perhaps have been more meticulous in his enquiry. From every angle, therefore, it is apparent that the Petitioners are entitled to be compensated. 16. Considering therefore, the case in its entirety this Court has no hesitation, but to hold that what these officers did not 27.02.1994 was something, which the law did not permit them to do. This Court, therefore, allows the Writ application but considering the area where the incident took place and also considering the overall poverty of these people living in "Jhopris", the sum of Rs. 52,000/ - per person as claimed, is very much on the higher side. This Court, therefore, awards compensation for mental agony and torture to the extent of Rs. 7,500/ - to each of the petitioners.
(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties.;