1. Proceedings have been initiated suo motu in the light of captioned media report of death of four persons on account of blast in a chemical factory at Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh.
2. In response to the advance notice issued by the Registry of this Tribunal dated 05.04.2023 to UP State PCB, District Magistrate, Bulandshahr and Nagar Palika, Bulandshahr, response has been filed by the District Magistrate, Bulandshahr, enclosing a joint report by State PCB, ADM, Bulandshahar and Nagar Palika, Bulandshahr to the effect that incident in question took place on 31.03.2023 at 12:00 noon. An explosion occurred in the area of Pathan Wale Bagh, Nayagaon resulting in death of four persons. The house was turned into debris. Bricks, debris and empty containers were found scattered in the area. Smell of chemical was also found. The Geo Coordinate of the incident site is Latitude-28.418015 and Longitude-77.856789. On investigation, it was found that Rajkumar S/o Late Bal Mukand was engaged in illegal manufacturing of fire crackers in violation of section 5 and 9B of Explosive Substances Rules and 285, 286 of Cr.PC. FIR was registered. The unit was operating at 789, Near School, Numaish ground, District Bulandshahr. Diwali crackers were being illegally manufactured. Same work has been again started by Rajkumar using chemicals of hazardous substances at a new site.
3. Though none appears for either parties, we have considered the matter and find that death of four persons is on account of illegal manufacturing of fire crackers. The report does not identify the deceased. It does not show whether heirs of the deceased have been given requisite compensation by the project proponent (PP) or the State. What steps have been taken to enforce the law are not mentioned.
4. It is well settled that the PP is liable to compensate victims under the principle of Absolute Liability laid down inter-alia in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors., (1987) 1 SCC 395. A person carrying on hazardous commercial activity has to take responsibility of consequences of his activity. The State Authorities have to ensure that no hazardous activity is carried on illegally and State has to pay compensation if it fails in its duty to prevent and regulate such activity which has not been done in the present case. Reference can be made to MCD v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association, (2011) 14 SCC 481. Scale of compensation has to be consistent with the principle of restitution on the pattern of Sarla Verma, (2009) 6 SCC 121.
5. This view has been taken by the Tribunal in large number of cases which have been dealt with wherein deaths and injuries have resulted on account of unregulated hazardous commercial activities.
6. Relevant extracts from order dated 28.03.2023 in O.A. No. 204/2023, In re: News item published in Newspaper The Hindu dated 07.03.2023 titled “Three children die during illegal mining in West Bengal” are as follows:-
“5. The Tribunal has dealt with number of cases of deaths and injuries to victims by failure to follow environmental norms and enforce right to environment which is part of right to life, heirs of the deceased and the victims have been held entitled to compensation on the principle of absolute liability arising out of doing hazardous commercial activity. Though such liability basically is of violator of law, where law violator is not made to pay compensation, the State has also been held to be liable to pay compensation as per its duty as welfare State to protect the citizen and also for failure to take steps to protect the citizens against hazardous illegal activities to prevent which is duty of the State. The Tribunal has acted consistently with parens patriae duty of the State in terms of law laid down inter alia in MCD v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Association, (2011) 14 SCC 481 and Vadodra Municipal Corporation v. Purshottam v. Murjani & Ors. (2014) 16 SCC 14. Some of the observations from Supreme Court judgements are:
“T.N. Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. State of T.N., (2017) 6 SCC 734 The State stands on the position of a loco parentis to the citizens and when there are so many deaths of farmers in the State of Tamil Nadu, it becomes obligatory on the part of the State to express concern and sensitiveness to do the needful and not allow the impecunious and poverty-stricken farmers to resign to their fate or leave the downtrodden and the poor to yield to the idea of fatalism. The concept is alien in the welfare State and the social justice which is required to be translated in a democratic body polity. As is manifest from the assertions and the grievances that have been agitated, deaths are due to famine backdrop and other natural causes and also due to immense financial problem. The State, as the guardian, is required to see how to solve these problems or to meet the problems by taking curative measures treating it as a natural disaster. Silence is not the answer.
MCD v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Assn., (2011) 14 SCC 481
The law is well settled that a constitutional court can award monetary compensation against the State and its officials for its failure to safeguard fundamental rights of citizens but there is no system or method to measure the damages caused in such situations Compensatory damages are intended to provide the claimant with a monetary amount necessary to recoup/replace what was lost, since damages in tort are generally awarded to place the claimants in the position he would have been in, had the tort not taken place; which are generally quantified under the heads of general damages and special damages. Punitive damages are intended to reform or to deter the wrongdoer from indulging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis for the claim. Punitive damages are not intended to compensate the claimant which he can claim in an ordinary private law claim in tort. Punitive damages are awarded by the constitutional court when the wrongdoer’s conduct was egregiously deceitful.”
6. We may also refer to some earlier orders of the Tribunal dealing with industrial and other accidents on account of violation of environmental norms in the State of West Bengal 1. News item published in the “Times of India” dated 20.11.2020 entitled “Six killed as blast tears through Malda Plastic recycling factory”, OA No. 272/2020 decided on 18.12.2020. 2. In re: News item published in The Economic Times dated 21.12.2021 titled “3 dead, 44 injured in flash fire at IOC’s Haldia refinery”, OA No. 440/2021 decided on 07.01.2022., where the Tribunal awarded compensation to the victims. Some extract from order dated 18.12.2020 in O.A. No. 272/2020, News item published in the “Times of India” dated 20.11.2020 entitled “Six killed as blast tears through Malda Plastic recycling factory” is reproduced below:-
“xxx……………………………..xxx…………………………xxx
6. The Tribunal dealt with the issue by requiring payment of compensation to the victims, restoration of environment and adopting suitable safety measures to avoid such recurrence in the light of Expert Committee reports. In the present case, the State PCB has acknowledged that the activity was illegal and the unit has now been found to be demolished. This cannot be sufficient step for enforcement of law and for remedy to the victims. The Tribunal fixed minimum interim compensation in such cases at Rs. 15 Lakhs in case of death, Rs. 5 Lakhs in case of serious injury and Rs. 2.5 Lakhs for simple injuries as follows Order dated 08.06.2020 in O.A. No. 22/2020 (WZ), Aryavart Foundation through its President v. Yashyashvi Rasayan Pvt. Ltd. and Anr:
“6. … we assess interim compensation for death to be 15 lacs each (taking into account multiplier of around 16 and loss of earning of about one lac a year, taking the minimum wage, apart from conventional sums), for grievous injury Rs. 5 lac per person, for other injuries of persons hospitalized Rs. 2.5 lac per person and for displacement at Rs. 25000/- per person.”
7. The State is under obligation to secure atleast this amount of compensation to the victims and if it is not able to do so, the State must pay this much amount of compensation out of its own funds, with liberty to recover the same from the persons responsible for the situation.
8. Accordingly, we direct the District Magistrate, Malda to give compensation in above terms to the victims within three months out of the State funds, excluding the amount already paid. It will be open to the District Magistrate to recover the amount from the concerned violators by taking coercive measures, as per law. The victims will be at liberty to seek any other relief in appropriate proceedings. This direction is without prejudice to the criminal liability of the management and the operators of such activities.”
7. In the present case, death of the children is patently due to violation of established norms. The State Authorities failed to enforce the law and prevent the incident. Apart from illegal engagement of children, the mining in the river bank is not shown to be by any Authority of Law, such as, mining lease, replenishment study, DSR and Environment Clearance. No safeguards have been used in the process. Thus, the State cannot escape liability for violation of environmental norms. While primary liability is of the persons engaged in illegal mining on ‘Absolute Principle’ laid down in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors., (1987) 1 SCC 395, when the violators have not been made to pay, it is the liability of the State to pay the compensation and recover the same from the violators. Liability for compensation is in addition to liability under the Criminal Law.
8. Further, vide order dated 11.06.2021 passed in O.A. No. 44/2021 titled as In re: News item published in The News Indian Express dated 12.02.2021 titled “At least 19 dead in Virudhunagar firecracker factory blast, more than 30 injured” the Tribunal held:-
“xxx …………………..…..…….xxx……………….………….xxx
9. …Compensation can be assessed on reasonable basis guided by restitution principle atleast at floor level, leaving other remedies of the victims open. Thus, broadly agreeing with the Committee, we direct that the scale of compensation should be Rs.20 lakhs in respect of each of the deceased victims and Rs.15 lakhs to persons who have burns in excess of 50% and Rs.10 lakhs for persons who have burns from 25 to 50% and Rs.5 lakhs for persons who have injuries between 5 to 25%. Victims who were treated as outpatients and who had but minor degree of burns or other forms of simple injuries shall be paid Rs.2 lakhs.”
9. ….xxx………………………xxx……………………………………xxx
10. In view of above, we direct the District Magistrate, Siliguri/Darjeeling to ensure payment of compensation @ ₹20 Lakh each to the heirs of the deceased and ₹5 Lakh to the injured, after deducting the amount already paid. The payment may be made within one month and make the violators accountable under Environmental Law be taken simultaneously at the earliest.
11. The State PCB may exercise its regulatory authority under the environmental laws - the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, the Environment (Protection) Act and Rules 1986, in coordination with any other concerned authority.”
7. There are several other cases where same view has been taken.
1. In re: Gas Leak at LG Polymers Chemical Plant in RR Venkatapuram Village Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh, OA No. 73/2020 decided on 01.06.2020.
2. Aryavart Foundation through its President vs. Yashyashvi Rasayan Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., OA No. 85/2020 (Earlier OA 22/2020) (WZ) decided on 03.02.2021.
3. Bonani Kakkar vs. Oil India Limited & Ors., OA No. 43/2020(EZ) decided on 19.02.2021.
4. News item published in the local daily “Economic Times” dated 30.06.2020 titled “Another Gas Leakage at Vizag Factory kills two, critically injures four…”, OA No. 106/2020 decided on 22.12.2020.
5. News item published in the “Indian Express” dated 01.07.2020 titled “Tamil Nadu Neyveli boiler blast: 6 dead, 17 injured”, OA No. 108/2020 decided on 22.12.2020.
6. News item published on 13.07.2020 in the local daily named “India Today” titled “Massive fire engulf Vizag chemical plant, explosions heard, injuries reported”, OA No. 134/2020 decided on 22.12.2020.
7. News item published in the “Times of India” dated 20.11.2020 entitled “Six killed as blast tears through Malda Plastic recycling factory”, OA No. 272/2020 decided on 18.12.2020.
8. News item published in the “Indian Express” dated 23.11.2020 entitled “Maharashtra: Two Killed,eight injured in methane gas leak in sugar factory”, OA No. 274/2020 decided on 16.08.2021.
9. In RE: News item published in the local daily “Indian Express Sunday Express” dated 28.06.2020 titled “Gas Leak in Agro Company Claims life of one”, O.A No. 107/2020 decided on 08.01.2021.
10. In re : News item published in Navbharat Times dated 24.12.2020 titled “Gas leaks in IFFCO Plant, 2 Officers dead”, O.A. No. 04/2021 decided on 04.06.2021.
11. In re: News item published in The Indian Express dated 07.01.2021 titled “Four workers dead due to toxic gas leak in Rourkela Steel Plant”, O.A. No. 09/2021 decided on 11.02.2021.
12. In re: News item published in The News Indian Express dated 12.02.2021 titled “At least 19 dead in Virudhunagar firecracker factory blast, more than 30 injured, O.A. No. 44/2021 decided on 03.03.2022.
13. In re: News item published in Times Now News dated 23.02.2021 titled “Karnataka: Six killed in quarry blast in Hirenagavalli, Chikkaballapur”, O.A. No. 59/2021 decided on 22.04.2022.
14. In re: News item published in The Hindu dated 23.02.2021 titled “Two dead, 5 missing in fire at UPL Plant”, O.A. No. 60/2021 decided on 14.12.2021.
15. In re: News item published in The Times of India dated 28.02.2021 titled “Delhi : Man charred to death as illegal factory catches fire”, O.A. No. 65/2021 decided on 31.08.2021.
16. In re: News item published in The Hindu dated 14.03.2021 titled “Safety lapses led to reactor blast at pharma unit”, OA No. 79/2021 decided on 31.08.2021.
17. In Re: News item published in the “Indian Express” dated 04.11.2020 titled “Ahmedabad: Nine killed as godown collapses after factory blast”, OA No. 258/2020 decided on 23.03.2021.
18. In re: News item published in The Times of India dated 08.06.2021 titled “18, mostly women, killed in fire at Pune chemical unit”, OA 130/2021 decided on 01.02.2022.
19. Rakesh Suresh Chandra Kapadia v. Gujarat Pollution Control Board & Ors., OA No. 31/2021 (WZ), decided on 08.11.2021.
20. In re: News item published in The Hindustan Times dated 17.06.2021, titled “Blast in firecracker unit in Maharashtra’s Palghar, at least 10 injured”, OA No. 134/2021 decided on 25.06.2021.
21. In re: News item published in The Indian Express dated 12.07.2021 titled “Six killed in factory fire: Owner held, raids on to nab second accused”, OA No. 171/2021 decided on 07.09.2021.
22. In re: News item published in The Indian Express dated 07.01.2022 titled “Gujarat: At least 06 dead, 20 sick after gas leak at industrial area in Surat”, OA No. 05/2022 decided on 18.01.2022.
23. In re: News item published in India Today dated 26.12.2021 titled “7 dead in boiler explosion at noodle factory in Bihar’s Muzaffarpur, probe ordered”, OA No. 02/2022 decided on 22.04.2022.
24. In re: News item published in The Economic Times dated 21.12.2021 titled “3 dead, 44 injured in flash fire at IOC’s Haldia refinery”, OA No. 440/2021 decided on 07.01.2022.
25. In re: News item published in The Tribune dated 22.02.2022 titled “7 killed in blast at firecrackers factory in Himachal Una”, OA No. 143/2022 decided on 08.03.2022.
26. In re: News item published in Hindustan Times dated 05.03.2022 titled “Bhagalpur: 14 dead in firecracker unit blast”, OA 198/2022 decided on 27.05.2022.
27. In re: News item published in The Times of India dated 12th April, 2022, titled “Six killed in chemical factory blast in Gujarat”, OA No. 272/2022 decided on 12.04.2022.
28. In re: News item in NDTV dated 14.04.2022 titled “6 killed, 12 injured after fire breaks out at Andhra Pradesh Pharma Unit”, OA No. 284/2022 decided on 20.04.2022.
29. In re : News item published in Business Standard dated 09.02.2023 titled “Blast at JSPL’s Raigarh plant kills two workers, two others injured”, OA No. 110/2023 decided on 28.02.2023
8. Following the above, we direct the District Magistrate, Bulandshahr to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 20 lakhs each to the heirs of the deceased adjusting the payments, if any, already made preferably within two months. The amount paid will be adjusted towards the claim in any other proceedings. The payment will be without prejudice to any other proceedings. The State will be at liberty to recover the amount from the owner of the godown where incident took place. The State may also take measures to prevent such incidents in future. For this purpose, the Chief Secretary may hold a follow up meeting within a month. Identity of victims may be ascertained by the SSP, Bulandshahr at the earliest to enable compensation being paid. Since it is stated that such illegal activities have been restarted, the statutory regulators may take necessary action to stop such illegal activities.
The application is disposed of.
If any person is aggrieved by the above order, he will be at liberty to move this Tribunal.
A copy of this order be forwarded to Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, SSP and District Magistrate, Bulandshahr, the State PCB and UP State Legal Services Authority by e-mail for compliance.
