Facts
The petitioner, a tenant in the house of respondent No. 5, filed a writ petition regarding the death of her minor daughter, Himashree Das
Source reference: p. 3On 19.05.2024, the daughter came into contact with a live high-voltage wire while on the building's terrace, resulting in fatal burn injuries; she succumbed to these injuries on 23.05.2024 at GMC&H
Source reference: p. 3An FIR was filed on 06.05.2024 (sic)
Source reference: p. 3The petitioner submitted a representation for compensation to the Managing Director of the Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) on 14.08.2025, which remained unconsidered
Source reference: p. 3, 5Issues
1. Whether the APDCL is liable to pay compensation for the death caused by an electrical accident under the AERC Regulations
Source reference: p. 3-42. Whether the non-consideration of the petitioner’s representation constitutes a failure of statutory duty by the licensee
Source reference: p. 3, 5Law Applied
Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission (Compensation to Victims of Electrical Accidents) Regulations, 2019, notified under Sections 181(1), 57(2), and 57(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003
Source reference: p. 3Specifically, Section 5 establishes liability if the accident is attributable to the licensee’s negligence; Section 6 and Schedule B fix the quantum for loss of human life at ₹4,00,000/-; Section 15 outlines the application procedure via Form B; and Section 20 mandates payment within 120 days of the accident, failing which a 12% per annum interest is applicable
Source reference: p. 4-5Reasoning
The Court noted that while the petitioner did not strictly follow the procedural requirement of filing "Form B" under Annexure-II, a formal representation was indeed received by the MD of APDCL on 14.08.2025
Source reference: p. 5The Court reasoned that the statutory framework under the 2019 Regulations creates a time-bound duty for the licensee to investigate and determine compensation once an accident is reported
Source reference: p. 4Because it could not determine negligence in the absence of the Chief Electrical Inspector’s report or APDCL’s response, the Court emphasized that the MD of APDCL must treat the pending representation as a formal application
Source reference: p. 6The Court highlighted that if negligence is found, the licensee is legally bound by Section 20 to pay interest due to the delay exceeding the 120-day statutory limit
Source reference: p. 5-6Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Managing Director, APDCL, to consider the petitioner’s representation as a "Form B" application
The MD must obtain a report from the Chief Electrical Inspector to determine if the accident was attributable to the licensee's fault. If attributable, compensation of ₹4,00,000/- plus 12% interest must be paid. If rejected, a speaking order must be issued. This process is to be completed within six months of the petitioner providing the certified order, FIR, post-mortem report, and death certificate
Source reference: p. 6-7Original Court PDF
Kalpana MahantavsThe State Of Assam And 4 Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in