2025:HHC:9879 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6840 of 2024 Decided on: 09.04.2025 Daulat Ram … Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner : M/s Dinesh Kumar and Vishal Verma, Advocates. For the respondents : Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Sugandh Verma, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “A. That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to pay 54 lakh rupees or the Hon’ble Court things fit as compensation to the petitioner, keeping in view that due to the accident earning of the petitioner has been affected and keeping in view the disability and the fact that he will require more money for continuing his treatment/ surgery or.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a Shepherd and on 14.02.2002, while grazing sheep he came into contact with a loose and unattended high-tension live wire (11 K.V.), which was 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:9879 hanging 5 feet above the ground and got electrocuted. An FIR was also registered in the Police Station and he remained hospitalized in different hospitals of the State as well as in P.G.I. Chandigarh and was ultimately discharged in the month of May, 2022. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that he may be granted compensation to the tune of Rs.54,00,000/- on the basis of the averments made in the writ petition that on account of this electrocution, the petitioner has become incapacitated as he now stands disabled to 85%, as is evident from Annexure P-4. 3. On the other hand, the petition is resisted by the respondent-Board, inter alia, on the ground that there are seriously disputed questions of fact involved in this petition and the petitioner did not suffer any injury on account of electrocution as alleged and injury suffered, if any, was only on account of the negligence of the petitioner. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the pleadings, one finds that there is an admission on the part of the Electricity Board that on the intervening night of 13.02.2022, there was heavy snow fall in the area, due to which one of the three conductors of 11 K.V. HT Line was snapped from the insulator, resulting in reduced clearance from the ground level. However, it is further mentioned in the reply that the petitioner was 3 2025:HHC:9879 having the knowledge of snow and that the height of the HT Line stood reduced, despite this, he took the risk and sat beneath the HT Line, which resulted in the fateful accident. 5. In the light of the fact that the mode and manner in which the accident took place is not much in dispute, this Court is of the considered view that it would be in the interest of justice in case this writ petition is disposed of by granting some reasonable compensation to the petitioner as an interim measure and by further relegating him to the appropriate Court of Law for claiming full damages. 6. Taking a cue from the judgments of Hon,ble Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP 374 of 2021, titled as Sohan Singh Bhardwaj Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, decided on 17.12.2024, as well as CWP No.2088 of 2018, titled as Sh. Rakesh Kumar Versus The Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and another, decided on 19.03.2019, as also the judgment of this Court in CWP No.1078 of 2023, titled as Smt. Santosh Kumari Versus The H.P. State Electricity Boards Ltd. & others, decided on 20.03.2025, this petition is disposed of with the direction that as an interim measure, let an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- be paid by Himachal Pradesh Electricity Board to the petitioner, with liberty to the petitioner to agitate his cause for grant of further compensation 4 2025:HHC:9879 before the appropriate Court of Law. The amount be released in favour of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today, failing which it will entail interest @ 6% from the date of judgment. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge April 09, 2025 (Rishi)