Rajeshwar Ganesh Panchal v. The Union Of India, Through Chief Secretary And ORS

PIL 62-2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 62 OF 2014 Rajeshwar Ganesh Panchal .. Petitioner V/s The Union of India & Ors.

.. Respondents The petitioner in person.

Mr. R.V. Govilkar with Mr. N.R. Prajapati for Union of India. Mr. A.B. Vagyani, Government Pleader with Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the respondent - State.

CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, CJ. & G.S. KULKARNI, J.

DATE : 13th JANUARY 2017 P.C.:

Learned counsel representing the Union of India places on record the revised guidelines as downloaded from the website, in terms of the instructions given in the letter of the Ministry. 2.

We have gone through the directions dated 13th August 2014, especially at para 22 of the order. Already State of Maharashtra has placed on record the information that the amount of compensation is enhanced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/-. 3.

So far as the Central Government is concerned, the revised guidelines of Central Scheme for Assistance to Civilian ABS

PIL 62-2014 Victims and the Family of Victims are placed on record today. As noticed from this Scheme, there is enhancement of compensation amount from Rs.3,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/- from the Central funds. Apart from that, they have also revised the scheme by taking certain protective measures so far as the amount payable to the victims or the dependents of victims. They have also stated how the amounts have to be paid through cheques and how the money has to be kept in fixed deposit so that the money will not be wasted and would be used for the basic necessities of the victims or the family of victims, as the case may be.

4.

According to us, there is compliance of directions at para 22 of the order dated 13th August 2014. If any individual applicant is not given the benefit of either the scheme made by the State Government or the Central Government, he is at liberty to approach the Court for specific direction to implement the guidelines if the applicant is entitled for such benefit.

5.

In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion nothing further needs to be directed in the matter and accordingly the PIL is closed.

(G.S. KULKARNI, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE ABS