Statutory compensation for electrical accidents applies only if the incident is attributable to licensee negligence.

In brief

The question

1. Whether the APDCL is liable to pay compensation for the death caused by an electrical accident under the AERC Regulations

The court held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Managing Director, APDCL, to consider the petitioner’s representation as a "Form B" application

It also directed

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

01Facts

The petitioner, a tenant in the house of respondent No. 5, filed a writ petition regarding the death of her minor daughter, Himashree Das

p. 3

On 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

p. 3

An FIR was filed on 06.05.2024 (sic)

p. 3

The 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

p. 3, 5

02Issues

i.1. Whether the APDCL is liable to pay compensation for the death caused by an electrical accident under the AERC Regulations

pp. 3-4

ii.2. Whether the non-consideration of the petitioner’s representation constitutes a failure of statutory duty by the licensee

p. 3, 5

03Law 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

p. 3

Specifically, 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

pp. 4-5

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Electricity Act, 2003 Section 181 Section 57

04Reasoning

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

p. 5

The 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

p. 4

Because 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

p. 6

The 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

pp. 5-6

05Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Managing Director, APDCL, to consider the petitioner’s representation as a "Form B" application

p. 6

pp. 6-7

LawLens.Gauhati High Court

Original Court PDF