BAIJU K G & ORS versus DR V P JOY

Citation: [2022] 3 S.C.R. 569 · Decided: 13-05-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Directions issued

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
569
   [2022] 3 S.C.R. 569
569
BAIJU K G & ORS
v.
DR V P JOY
(Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 244 of 2021)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 213 of 2011
MAY 13, 2022
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
SURYA KANT, JJ.]
Contempt of Court – Writ petition filed by persons affected
by the use of Endosulfan – Case of petitioners was that the use of
toxic pesticide called Endosulfan led to spread of mental and
physical ailments amongst residents of areas that were impacted by
its use – The Court on 10.01.2017 had directed the State Government
to compensate by distributing Rs.5 lakhs to each affected persons
within three months – The Court had also directed the State
Government to consider the feasibility of providing medical facilities
and treatment for life long ailments arising from the effects of
Endosulfan considering larger number of persons affected – A team
of officials from the Health and Revenue departments visited homes
of 3704 victims to whom compensation was not yet provided and
noticed that out of these victims, 102 were bedridden, 326 were
mentally disabled, 201 were physically disabled, 119 were afflicted
with cancer while 2966 fell in the residual category and the State
Government of Kerala virtually did nothing for five years – The
State Government took decision on 15.01.2022 authorizing disbursal
of an additional amount of Rs.200 crores for compensation to the
victims of Endosulfan – As of date, an amount of Rs 5 lakhs has
been disbursed to only eight persons who are the petitioners who
have moved these contempt proceedings – There is no rationale on
part of State Government in disbursing compensation only to those
having the ability to move this Court – The inordinate delay in
compensating the persons affected by the use of Endosulfan not
only reflects failure on part of State Government in complying with
Court’s order but also further compounds the violation of the
fundamental rights of such persons – That apart, in order dated
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
570
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 3 S.C.R.
10.01.2017, the State Government was directed to consider the
feasibility of providing medical facilities to deal with life-long health
issues arising out of the effects of Endosulfan – State Government
has not disclosed what steps it took to provide for medical treatment
and rehabilitation to these victims – The right to health is an integral
part of the right to life under Art.21 of the Constitution – The victims
who are suffering ought to have been provided immediate relief
and rehabilitation – Therefore, directions passed to Chief Secretary
to ensure that order dated 10.01.2017 is diligently implemented –
Eight petitioners be paid cost of Rs.50,000 – Contempt petition to
be listed on 18.07.2022.
Directing to list the contempt petition on 18.07.2022, the
Court
HELD : (i) Since the payment of compensation has been
made, though belatedly to eight petitioners who have moved
these proceedings, costs quantified at Rs 50,000 each shall be
paid over in addition to each of the eight persons within a period
of three weeks from the date of this order; (ii) The Chief Secretary
shall hold monthly meetings to ensure that the judgment of this
Court dated 10.01.2017 is diligently implemented by undertaking
the process of (a) identifying the victims of Endosulfan and drawing
up a list of beneficiaries; (b) ensuring the disbursement of
compensation of Rs 5 lakhs to each of the victims; and (c) taking
steps for ensuring due medical facilities within reasonable distance
from their places of residence in terms of the earlier directions
of this Court. (iii) An affidavit of compliance shall be filed
before this Court indicating the progress which has been made
between the date of this order and the next date of listing.
[Para 5][574-B-E]
Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993) 2 SCC 746 :
[1993] 2 SCR 581 – relied on.
Case Law Reference
[1993] 2 SCR 581
relied on
Para 4
INHERENT JURISDICTION :Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 244
of 2021.
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 213 of 2011.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
571
(Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India)
P. N. Ravindran, Sr. Adv., P. S. Sudheer, Rishi Maheshwari, Ms.
Shruti Jose, Bharat Sood, Advs. for the Petitioners.
Nishe Rajen Shonker, Mrs. Anu K. Joy, Alim Anvar, Advs. for the
Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J.
1. A contempt petition has been instituted before this Court by the
residents of Kasargod district in Kerala who were affected b

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.