BHOPAL GAS PEEDITH MAHILA UDYOG SANGATHAN AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA

Citation: [2007] 6 S.C.R. 24 · Decided: 04-05-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: C.K. THAKKER · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
BHOPAL GAS PEEDITH MAHILA UDYOG SANGATHAN AND ANR. 
B 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA 
MAY 4, 2007 
[C.K. THAKKER AND H.S. BED!, JJ.] 
Constitution of India-Articles 136, 226 & 227-Bhopal Gas Leak 
Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985-Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster 
C (Registration and Processing of Claims) Scheme, 1985-Voluntary 
Organisations filing interlocutory applications before this Court contending 
that compensation amount has not been paid by Union of India to a number 
of eligible victims of gas disaster for death and serious injury-Union of 
India contending that such victims can invoke the Scheme and get their 
claims adjudicated-Admissibility of the applications-Held, this Court, in 
D earlier decisions, has streamlined claims arising out of Bhopal Gas Leak 
Disaster-Consideration of claim and adjudication thereof require 
determination of facts-Claim by eligible victims must be dealt with in 
accordance with the Scheme under the Act. 
A massive escape of lethal gas from a storage tank of a company resulted 
E in large scale deaths, serious personal injuries, destruction of properties, 
loss of livestock, etc. Several cases and claims for compensation and damages 
were filed in different courts in India. The Union of India and the company 
entered into a settlement under which the company agreed to pay a specified 
sum in full settlement of all claims, rights and liabilities relating to the 
F disaster. This Court, in Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India & Ors., 
1198913 sec 38, observed that there were about 3000 cases of death and 
30,000 cases of personal injury and awarded appropriate compensation amount 
from out of the settlement amount. 
The applicants filed interlocutory applications before this Court 
G contending that there were many more deaths under the head 'death' than 
what was shown by the respondents and com[JCnsation had been paid; that all 
eligible victims had not been identified and ascertained and adequate 
compensation had not be paid to them; and that the nu.mber of cases in which 
compensation had been awarded under the head 'injury' were very small. The 
applicants prayed for issuance of appropriate directions to the respondent to 
H 
24 
--
., 
BHOPAL GAS PEEDITH MAH!LA UDYOG SANGA THAN v. U.O.l. 
25 
... 
\ 
pay compensation to the gas victims under the heads 'death' and 'injury'. 
A 
The Union of India contended that it framed the Bhopal Gas Leak 
Disaster (Registration and Processing of Claims) Scheme, 1985 under the 
Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims; Act, 1985 which provided 
for processing of claims and in accordance with the procedure laid down 
therein, claims had been adjudicated and payment of compensation had been B 
made; and that the victims, who have not got the compensation amount, can 
invoke the Scheme and get their claims adjudicated. 
Dismissing the applications, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. Re-examination of settlement or inadequacy of amount cannot c 
be done as the said issue has already been decided by a Constitution Bench of 
this Court in Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India & Ors. (1989] l 
SCC 674. This Court has streamlined the claims arising out of Bhopal Gas 
Tragedy Disaster. Precisely to deal with the cases of Bhopal Gas Tragedy that 
an Act has been enacted, a Scheme has been framed under the Act and the D 
Procedure has been laid down. They have been held to be constitutional and 
intra vires. Any person lodging a claim is required to make an application 
and a duty is cast on the authority to take an appropriate decision on the basis 
of the Scheme and Guidelines. Such adjudication has been held quasi-judicial 
in nature subject to appeal, revision and judicial review before the High Court 
under Articles 226 and 227 and even thereafter before this Court under Article E 
136 of the Constitution of India. Since the consideration of claim and 
adjudication thereof require determination of facts, the Court ruled that it 
must be done in accordance with the Scheme. Guidelines and Procedure under 
the Act and not in any other manner. So far as compensation is concerned, 
this Court has held that it should be in Indian currency and even under the F 
Scheme, such amount is fixed in Indian Rupees. If any person claims that he/ 
she is adversely affected by Bhopal Gs Tragedy Disaster, he/she is at liberty 
to take appropriate steps as suggested by this Court but not in any other 
manner. [Paras 9, 19 and 20] [28-G; 34-E-G; 35-B] 
Union Carbi

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