|
|
 |
(2006) 3 MLJ 912 (Mad)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Present : A.P. Shah, C.J. and D. Murugesan, J.
Case Number(s) : W.A. No. 475 of 2006.
Judgement Date :
Thursday 06th of July 2006
| R. Muthu | .....Appellant(s) | | Versus | | | State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Social Welfare Department, Chennai and Others | .....Respondent(s) |
Warning: strlen() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 167
Warning: substr() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 167
Constitution of India (1950), Article 226 — Death due to sterilisation — Payment of compensation — Applicability of G.O. (Ms.) No. 30, issued by the Health and Family Welfare (R1) Department dated 1.2.2001 — Claim for compensation denied on the ground that the operation was performed prior to the issuance of the Government Order — It is well settled that a prospective benefit granted under a statutory provision is in certain cases to be measured by, or depends on, antecedent facts, does not make the provision retrospective — Object of the Government Order is to confer the benefit of a fixed compensation in case of death due to sterilisation operation, for a period of one year from 1.2.2001 onwards — Such words do not indicate that the intention was to deny the benefit, where the death has occurred after the issuance of the Government Order but the sterilisation operation had taken place before the Government Order — Case is covered by the Government Order in question — Aggrieved party entitled to compensation — Writ appeal allowed.
Warning: strlen() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 167
Warning: substr() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given in /home/mljlib/public_html/nominal-index/showjudgment.php on line 167
Ratio(s) Decidendi
“Claim for compensation due to death caused by sterilisation cannot be denied solely on the ground that the operation was prior to the issuance of the Government order. In fact that a prospective benefit granted under a statutory provision is based on some antecedent facts, does not make the provision retrospective”.
Cases Referred
Boucher Pierre Andre v. Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar, New Delhi AIR 1975 SC 164
R. v. Birwistle, Justices 1889 58 LJMC 158
R. v. Mary Whitechapel (St. ) (Inhabitants) 1848 [12] QB 120
Oops. Login required for Full Text of Judgment.
You are not Logged in. Kindly Login.
If you are a new user then Register.
|
|
 |
|
 |
