Changeindia v. Government Of Tamilnadu

WP No.2988 of 2015 The Hon`ble The CHIEF JUSTICE and The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN CHANGEINDIA rep by its Director A.Narayanan, No.7C, Daffodil, Ceebros Gardens, Arcot Road, Virugambakkam, Chennai 600 092 Vs Government of Tamilnadu Rep by the Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009 and 4 others.

The Review Petition (Civil) No.3074 of 2016 has met expected fate of dismissal vide order dated 07.09.2016. This excuse is not available to the State Government now.

2. As per the progress report filed by respondent No.2, out of 41 untraceable cases, 9 have been traced out and further time is sought to trace the remaining 32 cases.

3. The petitioner has handed over to us in Court the summary position arising in respect of manual scavenging deaths and compensation in Tamil Nadu. For convenience, we reproduce the same as under:- 1.Total number of consolidated cases - (minus) repeat cases/duplication from other reports - (Minus) Families which received compensation so far (sewer-60/ septic tank-8) - ---- Cases on hand to be dealt - ----

2. a) Incidents, alleged to be NOT related

to manual scavenging - b) Persons, alleged to have survived - c) No such person existed, allegedly - --- Families that remain to be compensated now - Break up on the same:

3. a) Families who still remain untraceable as on date - b) Families denied rightful compensation (urban) - c) Families denied rightful compensation in rural areas - d) Families denied rightful compensation (Puducherry) - e) Families denied rightful compensation in Southern Railway -

4. Keeping in mind the aforesaid, further progress report will be filed by the respondents and the excuse of review petition not pending should result in payment being disbursed.

5. The petitioner appearing in person further states that various aspects of rehabilitation of persons involved in manual scavenging and improving the system of scavenging in a sense forms part of the Swachh Bharat Mission of the Central Government. He, thus, suggests that under that Mission itself, this issue can be discussed by involving the stakeholders.

6. The learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for respondent No.4 to obtain instruction in this behalf. The learned Additional Solicitor General to look into the concerns reflected in the rejoinder filed by the petitioner dated 18.08.2016 and respond to the same also by the next date of hearing.

7. List on 25.11.2016.

[CJ] [R M D J] 07/10/2016 bbr